[Federal Register: July 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 130)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 37309-37344]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09jy07-22]
[[Page 37309]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Federal Communications Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
47 CFR Part 73
Third Periodic Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting
the Conversion to Digital Television; Proposed Rule
[[Page 37310]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 07-91; FCC 07-70]
Third Periodic Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies
Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document begins the Commission's third periodic review of
the transition of the nation's broadcast television system from analog
to digital television. It provides a progress report on the DTV
transition and considers the procedures and rule changes necessary to
ensure that broadcasters timely complete their transitions. Congress
has mandated that after February 17, 2009, full-power television
broadcast stations must transmit only digital signals, and may no
longer transmit analog signals. This document considers how to ensure
that broadcasters complete construction of their final, post-transition
(digital) facilities by the statutory deadline.
DATES: Comments are due on or before August 8, 2007; reply comments are
due on or before August 23, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 07-91,
by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/.
Filers should follow the instructions provided
on the website for submitting comments. For ECFS filers, if multiple
docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding,
filers must transmit one electronic copy of the comments for each
docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing
the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S.
Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking
number.
E-mail: ecfs@fcc.gov. To get filing instructions, filers
should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following words
in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and directions
will be sent in response.
Mail: Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier
or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we
continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail).
Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four
copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number
appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two
additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. All
filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Commercial overnight mail
(other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be
sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal
Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail should be addressed to
445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery. The Commission's contractor will receive hand-
delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's
Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC
20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand
deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Parties who
choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each
filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the
caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies
for each additional docket or rulemaking number. All filings must be
addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
Accessibility Information: Contact the FCC to request
information in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print,
audio recording, and Braille) by sending an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY). This document can also be
downloaded in Word and Portable Document Format (PDF) at: http://www.fcc.gov
.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. Comments, reply comments, and ex
parte submissions will be available for public inspection during
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington,
DC, 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents
will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe
Acrobat. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Evan Baranoff, Evan.Baranoff@fcc.gov of the Media
Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-2120 or Eloise Gore,
Eloise.Gore@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-
2120; Gordon Godfrey, Gordon.Godfrey@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau,
Engineering Division, (202) 418-7000; Nazifa Sawez,
Nazifa.Sawez@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau, Video Division, (202) 418-
1600; or Alan Stillwell, Alan.Stillwell@fcc.gov, of the Office of
Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-2470.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 07-70, adopted on April 25, 2007, and
released on May 18, 2007. The full text of this document is available
for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the
FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th
Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also
be available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will
be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.)
The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy
contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554.
To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes,
large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an e-mail to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
This document has been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''), and contains proposed new and modified
information collection requirements, including the following proposals:
(1) Applications detailing stations' plans for completing their
transitions; (2) Applications to construct or modify post-transition
facilities (using FCC Forms 301 and 340); (3) Requests to reduce analog
TV service; (4) Requests to terminate analog TV service; (5) Requests
to flash cut; (6) Requests for STA to use analog translators to offset
[[Page 37311]]
loss of analog service; (7) Requests for extension of time to construct
(using FCC Form 337), or to toll the construction deadline for, DTV
facilities; (8) Requests to transition early to their post-transition
channel; (9) Requests for STA to temporarily remain on their in-core
pre-transition DTV channel; (10) Requests for STA to build less than
full, authorized post-transition facilities by the deadline; (11)
Applications for a license to cover post-transition facilities (using
FCC Form 302 DTV); and (12) PSIP requirement to populate the Event
Information Tables (``EITs'') with accurate information about each
event and to update the EIT if more accurate information becomes
available. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') to comment on the proposed information
collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the
PRA.
Written comments on the PRA proposed information collection
requirements must be submitted by the public, the OMB, and other
interested parties on or before September 7, 2007. Comments should
address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
we seek specific comment on how we might ``further reduce the
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees.''
In addition to filing comments with the Office of the Secretary, a
copy of any comments on the proposed information collection
requirements contained herein should be submitted to Cathy Williams,
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St, SW., Room 1-C823,
Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov;
and also to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB, Room 10234 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503, or via Internet to
Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov, or via fax at 202-395-5167. If you would like to
obtain a coy of this information collection, you may do so by visiting
the FCC's PRA webpage at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
Further Information. For additional information concerning the PRA
proposed information collection requirements contained in this
document, contact Cathy Williams at 202-418-2918, or via the Internet
to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov or PRA@fcc.gov.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0027.
Title: Application for Construction Permit for Commercial Broadcast
Station, FCC Form 301.
Form Number: FCC Form 301.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.
Number of Respondents: 4,278.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third
party disclosure requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 2 to 4 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 10,513 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $51,350,347.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), In the Matter of the Third Periodic
Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion
to Digital Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70. The NPRM
proposes that commercial television stations must use the proposed
revised FCC Form 301 when applying for post-transition facilities, when
requesting to reduce analog TV service and when requesting to
transition early to their post-transition channel. FCC Form 301 is
being revised to accommodate the filing of post-transition
applications.
FCC Form 301 is used to apply for authority to construct a new
commercial AM, FM, or TV broadcast station, to make changes in existing
facilities of such a station, and may be used to request a change of a
station's community of license by AM and non-reserved band FM
permittees and licensees. In addition, FM licensees or permittees may
request, by filing an application on FCC Form 301, upgrades on adjacent
and co-channels, modifications to adjacent channels of the same class,
and downgrades to adjacent channels.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0029.
Title: Application for TV Broadcast Station License, FCC Form 302
TV; Application for DTV Broadcast Station License, FCC Form 302-DTV,
Application for Construction Permit for Reserved Channel Noncommercial
Educational Broadcast Station, FCC Form 340; Application for Authority
to Construct or Make Changes in an FM Translator or FM Booster Station,
FCC Form 349.
Form Number(s): FCC Form 302 TV; FCC Form 302-DTV; FCC Form 340;
FCC Form 349.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions; State, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 4,325.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement;
Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Estimated Time per Response: 2 to 4 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 12,150 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $21,091,625.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), In the Matter of the Third Periodic
Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion
to Digital Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70, to consider the
procedures and rule changes necessary to complete the nation's
transition to DTV, including how best to ensure that broadcasters
complete construction of their facilities on their final, post-
transition (digital) channel by the statutory deadline.
The NPRM proposes that Noncommercial Education (NCE) television
stations must use the proposed revised FCC Form 340 when applying for
authority to construct or modify post-transition facilities; when
requesting to reduce analog TV service and when requesting to
transition early to their post-transition channel. Therefore, FCC Form
340 is being revised to accommodate the filing of applications to
construct or modify post-transition facilities.
The NPRM also proposes that stations that have applied to construct
or modify post-transition facilities must use the Form 302--DTV to
obtain a new or modified station license to cover those post-transition
facilities.
In addition, the Commission is consolidating information collection
OMB Control Number 3060-0837
[[Page 37312]]
(Application for DTV Broadcast Station License, FCC 302-DTV) into this
collection OMB Control Number 3060-0029.
FCC Forms 302-TV, 302-DTV and 349 remain unchanged.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0407.
Title: Application for Extension of Time to Construct a Digital
Television Broadcast Station, FCC Form 337; Section 73.3598, Period of
Construction.
Form Number: FCC Form 337.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents: 160.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement;
Recordkeeping requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 0.25 to 3 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 263 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $37,000.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking in the matter of the Third Periodic Review of
the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital
Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70, to consider the procedures
and rule changes necessary to complete the nation's transition to DTV,
including how best to ensure that broadcasters complete construction of
their facilities on their final, post-transition (digital) channel by
the statutory deadline.
The NPRM proposes that stations requesting an extension of time to
construct DTV facilities with construction deadlines occurring prior to
February 17, 2009, the station must use the Form 337 in accordance with
47 CFR 73.624(d)(3). The NPRM proposes to revise Form 337 to
accommodate these filings. Also, for stations with construction
deadlines occurring on February 17, 2009 and later, the station must
make a letter filing in accordance with 47 CFR 73.3598.
In addition, the Commission is consolidating information collection
OMB Control Number 3060-1001 (Application for Extension of Time to
Construct a Digital Television Broadcast Station, FCC Form 337) into
this collection OMB Control Number 3060-0407 (Section 73.3598, Period
of Construction).
OMB Control Number: 3060-0386.
Title: Section 73.1635, Special Temporary Authorizations (STAs).
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents: 2,350.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1 to 4 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 2,800 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $1,403,150.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of the Third Periodic Review of
the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital
Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70, to consider the procedures
and rule changes necessary to complete the nation's transition to DTV,
including how best to ensure that broadcasters complete construction of
their facilities on their final, post-transition (digital) channel by
the statutory deadline.
For purposes of the DTV transition, the NPRM proposes that stations
may file requests for Special Temporary Authorities (STAs) to use
analog translators to offset the loss of analog service when seeking to
reduce or terminate analog service prior to the transition deadline
(i.e., February 17, 2009); to temporarily remain on their in-core pre-
transition DTV channel after the DTV transition deadline (i.e.,
February 17, 2009), and to build less than full, authorized post-
transition facilities by the transition deadline (i.e., February 17,
2009).
OMB Control Number: 3060-0216.
Title: Informal Requests to Discontinue Only One Service and
Informal Requests to Flash Cut; Section 73.3538, Application To Make
Changes in an Existing Station, Section 73.1690(e) Modification of
Transmission Systems.
Form Number: Not Applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents: 700.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement;
Recordkeeping requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 0.50--3 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 1,125 hours
Total Annual Costs: None.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of the Third Periodic Review of
the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital
Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70, to consider the procedures
and rule changes necessary to complete the nation's transition to DTV,
including how best to ensure that broadcasters complete construction of
their facilities on their final, post-transition (digital) channel by
the statutory deadline.
The NPRM proposes to allow stations to request Commission approval
to discontinue analog TV service prior to the end of the DTV
transition. To obtain such approval from the Commission, the NPRM
proposes to allow stations to make such requests by sending a letter to
the Video Division of the Media Bureau and sending an e-mail to
analog@fcc.gov in lieu of filing an application for construction permit
(e.g., Form 301 or Form 340).
The NPRM also considers whether to allow stations to request
Commission approval to return their currently assigned, pre-transition-
only DTV channel (i.e., a DTV channel that is not their final, post-
transition channel) and flash cut at or before the transition deadline
from their current analog channel to their final, post-transition
channel.
Section 73.1690(e) of the Commission's rules requires AM, FM and TV
station licensees to prepare an informal statement or diagram
describing any electrical and mechanical modification to authorized
transmitting equipment that can be made without prior Commission
approval provided that equipment performance measurements are made to
ensure compliance with FCC rules. This informal statement or diagram
must be retained at the transmitter site as long as the equipment is in
use. This requirement is approved in OMB Control Number 3060-0374, but
is being consolidated into this collection (3060-0216).
Section 73.3538 requires broadcast stations to file an informal
application to modify or discontinue the obstruction marking or
lighting of an antenna supporting structure. The NPRM does
[[Page 37313]]
not affect this requirement. It has already been approved by OMB.
OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.
Title: Digital TV Transition Status Report.
Form Number: FCC Form 387.
Type of Review: New Collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents: 1,812.
Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirement.
Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 3,624 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $1,268,400.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of the Third Periodic Review of
the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital
Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70. This is a review of the
transition of the nation's broadcast television system from analog to
digital television. This NPRM, among other things, proposes to require
all full-power television stations to file a form (FCC Form 387) with
the Commission detailing their transition status on or before December
1, 2007.
OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.
Title: Section 73.682(d), TV Transmission Standards.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: New Collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents: 1,812.
Frequency of Response: Weekly reporting requirement; Third party
disclosure requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 0.50 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 47,112 hours.
Total Annual Costs: None.
Nature of Response: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality required.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: On April 25, 2007, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of the Third Periodic Review of
the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital
Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-70. The NPRM proposes to update
Section 73.682(d) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 73.682(d), to
reflect revisions to the Advanced Television Systems Committee Inc's
(ATSC) Program System Information Protocol (PSIP) standard. The revised
ATSC PSIP standard requires broadcasters to populate the Event
Information Tables (``EITs'') with accurate information about each
event and to update the EIT if more accurate information becomes
available. In other words, it requires broadcasters to provide detailed
programming information when transmitting their broadcast signal.
Currently, under version A/65-B, many broadcasters provide only general
information in the EIT tables.
Summary of the NPRM of Proposed Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. Congress has mandated that after February 17, 2009, full-power
broadcast stations must transmit only in digital signals, and may no
longer transmit analog signals. With this Notice of Proposed Rule
Making (``NPRM''), we begin our third periodic review of the transition
of the nation's broadcast television system from analog to digital
television (``DTV''). The Commission has conducted two prior periodic
reviews: the first in MM Docket No. 00-39 and the second in MB Docket
No. 03-15. We conduct these periodic reviews in order to assess the
progress of the transition and make any necessary adjustments to the
Commission's rules and policies to facilitate the introduction of DTV
service and the recovery of spectrum at the end of the transition.
Here, we consider how to ensure that broadcasters complete construction
of their final, post-transition (digital) facilities by the statutory
deadline.
II. Executive Summary
2. In this Third DTV Periodic Review, we (1) provide a progress
report on the transition; (2) describe the status and readiness of
existing stations to complete the transition; (3) analyze and propose
the procedures and rule changes necessary to complete the transition;
and (4) address other issues related to the transition. Stations that
have not completed construction of their post-transition channels must
focus their full attention on the construction efforts necessary to
move from analog to digital transmission no later than the February 17,
2009 deadline established by Congress. Specifically, we propose the
following actions to facilitate the transition for full-power
television stations (We note that the statutory transition deadline
applies only to full-power stations; see 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14) and
337(e). We will address the digital transition for low power television
(``LPTV'') stations in a separate proceeding. The Commission previously
determined that it has discretion under 47 U.S.C. 336(f)(4) to set the
date by which analog operations of stations in the low power and
translator service must cease. Accordingly, the Commission decided not
to establish a fixed termination date for the low power digital
television transition until it resolved the issues concerning the
transition of full-power television stations):
We tentatively conclude that February 17, 2009 will be the
construction deadline for stations that are building digital facilities
based on their new channel allotments in the new DTV Table of
Allotments (``DTV Table'') and accompanying Appendix B (``new DTV Table
Appendix B''), which will be established by an order in the
Commission's DTV proceeding, MB Docket No. 87-268 (i.e., stations whose
DTV channel for pre-transition operation is not their channel for post-
transition use). The Commission proposed channel assignments and
reference facilities for stations' post-transition operations in a 2006
Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MB Docket No. 87-268. See Advanced
Television Systems and Their Impact upon the Existing Television
Broadcast Service, MB Docket No. 87-268, Seventh Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, 71 FR 66592-01 (Nov. 15, 2006) (``Seventh
FNPRM''). The Seventh FNPRM sets forth a channel for each eligible
broadcast TV station in the proposed new DTV Table. The details of each
station's channel assignment, including technical facilities and
predicted service and interference information, are set forth in the
proposed new DTV Table. [Section V.C.1. and proposed rule 47 CFR
73.624(d)(1)(v)]
We propose that stations whose post-transition channel is
the same as their pre-transition DTV channel, who are not facing unique
technical challenges, and who are granted either an extension in the
Construction Deadline Extension Order or a waiver in the Use-or-Lose
Order must complete construction of their DTV facilities by the
deadline established in those orders (i.e., six months from the release
date of the orders). These stations have had their post-transition
channel assignments for several years. [Section V.C.2.]
We propose that February 17, 2009 will be the construction
deadline for stations facing unique technical
[[Page 37314]]
challenges, such as those with side-mounted digital antennas or similar
situations in which the operation of their analog service prevents the
completion of their full, authorized digital facilities. [Section
V.C.3.]
We tentatively conclude that stations that have not
completed construction of full, authorized facilities on their pre-
transition channel may be excused from completion of construction if
this is not their post-transition channel. Our proposal applies to
stations that have pending construction permits (``CPs''), that have
requested CP extensions, that have been granted CP extensions, that
have been granted waivers of the use-or-lose deadlines, and that have
waivers for their checklist facility deadline. These stations will be
permitted to carry-over protection to their full, authorized
facilities. [Section V.C.1.]
We propose to restrict the situations in which grants of
an extension of time to construct digital facilities will be considered
for construction deadlines prior to the end of the transition. In
addition, beginning February 17, 2009, we propose to apply the existing
``tolling'' standard applied to analog stations to requests for
additional time to construct digital facilities and will toll the
construction deadline only in limited and unavoidable circumstances.
[Section V.C.4. and proposed rule 47 CFR 73.624(d)(3)]
We propose to require all full-power television stations
to file a form with the Commission detailing their current transition
status, additional steps necessary in order to be prepared for digital-
only operation on February 17, 2009, and a timeline for making those
steps. [Section V., paragraph 35]
We consider whether and, if so, under what circumstances
we should accept new requests by stations to return their pre-
transition-only DTV channel (i.e., a DTV channel that is not their
final, post-transition channel) before the end of the transition and
``flash cut'' from their analog channel to their post-transition
channel. [Section V.B.]
We examine the circumstances in which a station may be
allowed to reduce or terminate its analog service to facilitate
construction of its final, DTV facility on its post-transition channel.
[Section V.A.]
We propose to allow stations to operate on newly allotted
post-transition facilities before the transition deadline provided they
would not interfere with existing, pre-transition service. [Section
V.C.5.]
We request comment on additional proposals to provide
stations with regulatory flexibility to facilitate stations'
construction of their post-transition facilities by the statutory
deadline. [Section V.C.6.]
We propose to offer expedited processing to a station
applying for a CP to build its post-transition channel, provided that
its application (i) does not seek to expand the station's noise-limited
service contour in any direction beyond that established by the new DTV
Table Appendix B; (ii) specifies facilities that match or closely
approximate those new DTV Table Appendix B facilities (i.e., if the
station is unable to build precisely the facilities specified in the
new DTV Table Appendix B, then it must apply for facilities that
deviate no more than five percent from those new DTV Table Appendix B
facilities with respect to predicted population); and (iii) is filed
within 45 days of the effective date of Section 73.616 of the rules
adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding. We propose to
revise FCC Forms 301 and 340 accordingly. [Section V.D.]
We tentatively conclude that we will not accept
applications to expand post-transition facilities until we have
completed processing the applications to build authorized facilities,
but we seek comment on ways to consider expansion applications sooner
without delaying the transition. [Section V.E.]
We tentatively conclude to adopt a new 0.5 percent
interference standard to apply to maximizations and to new channel
allotments after the transition. [Section V.F. and proposed rule 47 CFR
73.616]
We propose to update the Commission's rules to reflect any
revisions to the ATSC standards concerning DTV transmission and PSIP
since the adoption of the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order.
[Sections V.G.1. and V.G.2. and proposed rule 47 CFR 73.882(d)]
We seek comment on whether the Commission can and should
revise Section 73.624(g) to require DTV stations that are permittees
operating pursuant to a DTV STA or other FCC authorization for DTV
transmission to file FCC Form 317 and pay fees on any revenue derived
from feeable ancillary or supplementary services in the same way
required of DTV licensees. [Section V.G.3.]
We invite comment on whether further amendments are needed
to the station identification rules and, in particular, whether the
current rules provide for appropriate identification of multicast
channels. [Section V.G.4.]
We invite comment on whether coordination is needed
between broadcasters and MVPDs to ensure a smooth transition, whether
this coordination is underway, and what actions the Commission should
take to assist broadcasters with their coordination efforts. [Section
V.G.6.]
III. Background
3. Congress specifically requires the Commission to evaluate the
progress of the nation's transition to digital television. The first
DTV periodic review began in March 2000 and the second in January 2003.
In addition to these periodic reviews, the Commission has continued to
conduct its DTV proceeding, through which it has developed new channel
allotments and assignments. The Commission established the initial DTV
Table of Allotments in 1997. See Advanced Television Systems and Their
Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service, MM Docket No.
87-268, Sixth Report and Order, 62 FR 26684-01 (May 14, 1997) (``Sixth
Report and Order''). The details of each station's channel assignment
under the initial DTV Table, including technical facilities and
predicted service and interference information, were set forth in the
initial Appendix B of the Sixth Report and Order. The initial Appendix
B was amended in 1998. Simultaneous with the adoption of the Sixth
Report and Order, the Commission announced DTV channel assignments for
eligible licensees in the Fifth Report and Order, 62 FR 26966-02 (May
16, 1997), in the same docket. The Commission recently issued a Seventh
FNPRM in connection with the DTV proceeding.
4. The Second Periodic Review of the Commission's Rules and
Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, MB Docket No.
03-15, Report and Order, 69 FR 59500 (October 4, 2004) (``Second DTV
Periodic Report and Order'') established a three-round channel-election
process through which eligible broadcast licensees and permittees
(collectively, ``licensees'') selected their post-transition channels
inside the core TV spectrum (i.e., channels 2-51). The Commission
received 11 petitions for reconsideration of the Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order, raising a number of issues, most of which have been
rendered moot by the completion of the channel election process . At
the start of this process, licensees proposed their post-transition
facilities. (In November 2004, licensees filed certifications via FCC
Form 381 in order to define their proposed post-transition facilities.
In these certifications, licensees chose whether to (1) replicate their
allotted facilities, (2) maximize to their currently authorized
facilities, or (3) reduce to a
[[Page 37315]]
currently authorized smaller facility. Stations that did not submit
certification forms by the deadline were evaluated based on replication
facilities.) After each channel election round, the Commission
announced proposed post-transition channels--called tentative channel
designations (``TCDs'').
5. The channel election process culminated in the adoption of the
Seventh FNPRM, which proposed a new DTV Table. (Comments on the
proposed new DTV Table were due January 25th and replies were due
February 26th.) The proposed new DTV Table provides eligible stations
with channels for post-transition operations inside the core TV
spectrum. The DTV Table is based on the TCDs announced for stations, as
well as the Commission's efforts to promote overall spectrum efficiency
and ensure that broadcasters provide the best possible service to the
public, including service to local communities. The proposed DTV Table
will ultimately replace the current DTV Table. (The Seventh FNPRM
proposes to codify the new DTV Table in 47 CFR 73.622(i). The current
DTV Table, which is contained in 47 CFR 73.622(b), will become obsolete
at the end of all authorized interim DTV operations. The current NTSC
Table, which is contained in 47 CFR 73.606(b), will become obsolete at
the end of the transition, when all full-power analog operations must
cease.)
6. In early 2006, Congress enacted significant statutory changes to
the DTV transition in the Digital Television and Public Safety Act of
2005 (``DTV Act''). (The DTV Act is Title III of the Deficit Reduction
Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4 (2006) (``DRA''), and is
codified at 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14) and 337(e).) Most importantly, it set
February 17, 2009, as the date certain for the end of the DTV
transition, at which time all full-power television broadcast stations
must cease their analog transmissions. (The DTV Act amends 47 U.S.C.
309(j)(14)(A) to establish February 17, 2009 as a new hard deadline for
the end of analog transmissions by full-power stations and directs the
Commission to ``take such actions as are necessary (1) to terminate all
licenses for full-power television stations in the analog television
service, and to require the cessation of broadcasting by full-power
stations in the analog television service, by February 18, 2009; and
(2) to require by February 18, 2009, * * * all broadcasting by full-
power stations in the digital television service, occur only on
channels between channels 2 and 36, inclusive, or 38 and 51, inclusive
(between frequencies 54 and 698 megahertz, inclusive).'') The DTV Act
does not provide for waivers or extensions of this deadline for
cessation of analog broadcasts. (Previously, 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14)
provided an exception to the earlier December 31, 2006 transition
deadline if the Commission determined that less than 85 percent of the
television households in a licensee's market were capable of receiving
the signals of DTV broadcast stations through various means (i.e., via
over-the-air reception, cable or satellite, or digital-to-analog
conversion technology). Congress eliminated the statutory provisions
authorizing market-specific extensions of the DTV transition, including
the 85 percent benchmark for DTV reception. This new hard deadline
obviates the need for any further discussion of how to interpret and
implement the former Section 309(j)(14)(B) of the Act, an issue
previously deferred by the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order.) The
DTV Act also requires broadcast licensees to cease operations outside
the core spectrum after February 17, 2009 in order to make that
spectrum available for public safety and commercial wireless uses.
Full-power TV broadcast stations must be operating inside the core TV
spectrum and only in digital upon the end of the transition on February
17, 2009. (The DTV Act also created a coupon program to subsidize the
purchase of digital-to-analog (``D-to-A'') converter boxes.)
IV. Progress Report
7. The transition to DTV is a complex undertaking, affecting
virtually every segment of the television industry and every American
who watches television. The Commission has been facilitating the
migration to DTV by adopting a standard for digital broadcasting,
creating an initial DTV Table, awarding DTV licenses, establishing
operating rules for the new service, monitoring the physical build-out
of DTV broadcast stations, and helping to educate consumers about the
transition. At the end of the transition, television broadcast
operations will be limited to the core TV spectrum, enabling the
recovery of a total of 108 MHz of spectrum (i.e., TV channels 52-69).
(The core TV spectrum is comprised of low-VHF channels 2 to 4 (54-72
MHz) and 5 to 6 (76-88 MHz), VHF channels 7 to 13 (174-216 MHz) and UHF
channels 14-51 (470-698 MHz), but does not include TV channel 37 (608-
614 MHz), which is used for radio astronomy research.) Twenty-four
megahertz of spectrum currently used for TV broadcast channels 63, 64,
68, and 69 have been reallocated for critically important public safety
needs. The remaining 84 MHz (currently TV broadcast channels 52-62 and
65-67) have been or will be auctioned for new wireless services.
(Channels 60-69 (746-806 MHz) were reallocated for public safety and
wireless communications services in 1998. Channels 52-59 were
reallocated for new wireless services in 2001.)
A. Status of DTV Operations
8. In 1997, the Commission granted eligible licensees a paired
channel for digital operations during the transition and set dates for
construction and operation of broadcasters' facilities on their
allotted DTV channels. Pursuant to the construction schedule set forth
in Section 73.624(d) of the Commission's rules, affiliates of the top
four networks in the top ten television markets were required to
complete construction of their DTV facilities by May 1, 1999; top four
network affiliates in markets 11-30 by November 1, 1999; all remaining
commercial television stations by May 1, 2002; and all noncommercial
educational (``NCE'') television stations by May 1, 2003.
9. As of April 2, 2007, 1,702 television stations in all markets
(representing approximately 98.8 percent of all stations) have been
granted a DTV construction permit (``CP'') or license. A total of 1,603
stations are now broadcasting a digital signal. Of these, 1,215
stations are authorized with licensed facilities or program test
authority and 388 stations are operating pursuant to special temporary
authority (``STA'') or experimental DTV authority.
10. In the top 30 television markets, all 119 top-four network-
affiliated television stations are on the air in digital, 110 with
licensed DTV facilities or program test authority and nine with STAs.
In markets 1-10, all 40 top-four network affiliated stations are
providing digital service, 38 with licensed DTV facilities and two with
STAs. In markets 11-30, all top-four 79 network affiliated stations are
providing DTV service, 74 with licensed DTV facilities and five with
STAs.
11. Approximately 1,230 commercial television stations were due to
commence digital broadcasts by May 1, 2002. As of April 2, 2007, 1,136
of these stations (92.4 percent) are broadcasting a digital signal. In
addition, approximately 373 NCE television stations were required to
commence digital operations by May 1, 2003. As of April 2, 2007, 348
(93.3 percent) of these stations are broadcasting a digital signal.
(The commercial and NCE TV stations that have not commenced digital
broadcasts were required to file a request for extension of additional
[[Page 37316]]
time to complete construction of their DTV facilities by the deadline
established for them in 47 CFR 73.624(d)(1).)
B. Status of Consumer Capability to Receive DTV Signals
12. In connection with the 2006 Competition Report, the Commission
requested information about the number of households relying solely on
over-the-air broadcast television for programming. (The Commission also
sought information about the number of cable and satellite households
that rely on over-the-air service on one or more of their television
sets not connected to a multichannel video programming distributor
(``MVPD'').) In comments filed to that proceeding, the National
Association of Broadcasters (``NAB'') indicated that there are
approximately 69 million television sets are not connected to any MVPD
service. Specifically, NAB reported that nearly 19.6 million households
rely solely on over-the-air broadcast television, and there are
approximately 45.5 million sets in those homes. NAB states that ``in
these 19.6 million over-the-air households, there are approximately 1.3
million over-the-air digital sets.'' Thus, according to NAB, ``[t]here
are roughly 18.7 million over-the-air households with only analog sets,
and these households have about 44.2 million analog sets.'' NAB reports
that an additional 23.5 million television sets in 14.7 million MVPD
households remain unconnected to the MVPD service. NAB states that this
2006 data showing large numbers of over-the-air television sets is
consistent with two surveys conducted in 2005.
13. The demand for DTV sets has grown with increased availability
of DTV programming and receiving equipment and a steady drop in the
price of such equipment. The Consumer Electronics Association (``CEA'')
reports that the consumer electronics industry has invested $66.7
billion in DTV products since 1998. Moreover, CEA reports more than $75
billion in consumer investment in DTV products. According to CEA, 23.9
million DTV sets and monitors were sold in 2006. CEA predicts that 29.2
million DTV products will be sold in 2007, 33.4 million in 2008, 35.2
million in 2009 and 36.4 million in 2010. CEA estimates that DTV sales
will represent 69 percent of all TV sales in 2006. (CEA projects that
DTV sales will represent 92 percent of all TV sales in 2007.)
14. In order to promote the availability of reception equipment and
protect consumers by ensuring that their television sets continue to
work in the digital world just as they do today, the Commission
established a DTV tuner mandate, which requires, as of March 1, 2007,
that all television receiver equipment (e.g., TV sets (all sizes),
VCRs, digital video recorders, and any other TV receiving devices)
manufactured or shipped in interstate commerce or imported into the
United States, for sale or resale to the public, must be capable of
receiving the signals of DTV broadcast stations over-the-air. (In 2002,
the Commission initiated the DTV tuner mandate, with a phase-in period
based on screen size to minimize the cost impact on consumers. In 2005,
the Commission accelerated the implementation of the DTV tuner mandate
to become effective on March 1, 2007 and expanded the mandate to
include television sets less than 13 inches.)
15. In addition, subsidized digital-to-analog (``D-to-A'')
converter boxes will be available to eligible consumers starting
January 2008, further promoting access to digital reception equipment.
(See Rules to Implement and Administer a Coupon Program for Digital-to-
Analog Converter Boxes, NTIA Docket No. 0612242667-7051-01, Final Rule,
72 FR 12097 at paragraph 8 (``NTIA Coupon Program Final Rule''); 47 CFR
301. Starting January 1, 2008, all U.S. households will be eligible to
request up to two $40 coupons to be used toward the purchase of up to
two, D-to-A converter boxes, while the initial $990 million allocated
for the program is available; 47 CFR 301.3-4. If the initial funds are
used up and the additional funds (up to $510 million) are authorized,
eligibility for the coupons will be limited to over-the-air-only
television households. Eligible consumers will have until March 31,
2009 to make a request for these coupons.) This subsidy program, which
was created by the DTV Act, will allow consumers with analog-only TV
sets to receive over-the-air broadcast programming after the February
17, 2009 transition date, when analog broadcasting ends. Without a D-
to-A converter box, consumers will not be able to view full-power TV
broadcasts after the transition date unless they purchase DTV sets
(television sets with a built-in digital tuner) or subscribe to a pay
television service. Congress directed the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (``NTIA'') of the U.S. Department of
Commerce to administer this subsidy program. (The DTV Act directs the
Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information to ``implement
and administer a program through which households in the United States
may obtain coupons that can be applied toward the purchase of digital-
to-analog converter boxes.'' The purpose of the program is to enable
consumers to continue receiving broadcast programming over the air
using analog-only televisions not connected to cable or satellite
service.) In March 2007, NTIA issued final rules to implement the
program, which subsidizes the purchase of D-to-A converter boxes.
C. Status of Broadcasters' Transition
16. Stations are responsible for meeting the statutory deadline for
the DTV transition. The Commission has no discretion to waive or change
this transition date. Full-power broadcast stations not ready to
commence digital operations upon expiration of the deadline for the
transition on February 17, 2009 must go dark and risk losing their
authorizations to operate after the transition date. (A station failing
to meet its construction deadline may be subject to license revocation
procedures (47 U.S.C. 312), the issuance of forfeitures (47 U.S.C.
503), or other remedial measures, such as admonishment. For example, we
remind licensees that ``if a broadcasting station fails to transmit
broadcast signals for any consecutive 12-month period, then the station
license granted for the operation of that broadcast station expires at
the end of that period, notwithstanding any provision, term, or
condition of the license to the contrary;'' 47 U.S.C. 312(g). If
discontinuing operations, stations must also be mindful of the
Commission's rules.)
17. We have proposed post-transition channel assignments for all
eligible stations. (These post-transition channel assignments largely
were based on the choices made by licensees during the channel-election
process. Eligibility for a proposed post-transition channel assignment
was limited to existing Commission licensees and permittees.) In the
proposed new DTV Table, 1,812 stations received proposed post-
transition DTV channels. (This total includes 1,806 stations announced
in Appendix A to the Seventh FNPRM and six additional stations
announced in a subsequent Public Notice. Additional new permittees may
also be announced before the transition deadline.) Of these, 1,178
stations received the DTV channel on which they are currently
authorized, 517 stations received the NTSC channel on which they are
currently authorized, and 117 stations received a different channel
from which they are currently authorized.
[[Page 37317]]
18. The process of transitioning the entire TV broadcast industry
to digital-only operation on each station's final channels will be
complex. Accordingly, stations already should be planning their
transition to digital-only service on their post-transition channel.
Some stations may now be ready, or very close to ready, to make their
transition. We have provided a list of 752 stations that we believe
fall into this category and seek input from those stations regarding
our assessment.
19. Most stations, however, will need to take significant steps to
accomplish their transition. Stations' situations will vary based on
their final channel assignments in the new DTV Table and whether, and
if so to what extent, they must change their transmission facilities to
operate on their post-transition channels. As described below, stations
may seek to change their antenna or tower locations. (A station that
must change its DTV tower location may face a considerable challenge,
especially if the station must construct a new tower. Such a station
must consider whether there are any existing towers that can be used or
if a new tower must be constructed. Because of the lead times involved
in purchasing or leasing land with appropriate FAA clearances, local
and state zoning requirements, and varying timelines for designing the
new tower, ordering equipment, delivery of equipment, and construction-
related issues, such a station must begin planning as soon as possible
in order to transition by the deadline. In some cases, building a new
tower at this stage in the process may no longer be a viable option.)
Stations may also need to change their effective radiated power (ERP),
antenna height above average terrain (HAAT) or antenna pattern as set
forth in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as adopted.
20. Before discussing the issues that must be addressed to complete
the transition, we first categorize the circumstances that stations are
in to describe what stations in each group must accomplish. First,
there are stations that will remain on their current DTV in-core
channel. Second, there are stations that will return to their analog
in-core channel. Third, there are stations that will move to a
completely new in-core channel. In addition to these three general
categories, stations without a paired channel (i.e., ``singleton
stations'') that will ``flash cut'' from broadcasting on their analog
channel to broadcasting on a digital channel raise unique issues that
we will consider separately. (``Singletons'' or ``single-channel
licensees'' refers to those licensees that do not have a second or
``paired'' channel to convert to DTV. ``Flash-cut'' refers to the
situation where a station gives up its pre-transition digital channel
and transitions to digital service using its analog channel or a newly
allotted channel.) We seek comment on these categories and
circumstances in general and on the particular tentative conclusions,
proposals and queries in the Issue Analysis (section V), below.
1. Category One: Stations Remaining on Their Current DTV In-Core
Channel
21. There are 1,178 stations remaining on their current DTV in-core
channel for post-transition operations, based on the proposed new DTV
Table. Most of these stations will have a relatively simple transition
because they already have the authorizations necessary to operate at
their proposed post-transition facilities as specified in the proposed
new DTV Table Appendix B. In fact, many of these stations have already
constructed and received licenses for their post-transition facilities,
and so will simply turn off their analog service to complete their
transition.
22. Some stations in this category, however, may not have completed
their authorized construction. This would include a station that has
not built anything and has a CP or extension of its ``checklist''
deadline and a station that has constructed a reduced facility and is
operating pursuant to Special Temporary Authority (``STA''). In
addition to turning off their analog service, these stations may need
to make changes to match their post-transition facilities as specified
in the new DTV Table Appendix B. The difficulty faced by these stations
will depend on the type of change and degree of change required to
complete their authorized construction. (For example, stations in this
category may need to adjust their transmitter power, their antenna
design, their antenna location, or some combination thereof. We expect
that relatively minor adjustments to operating power can be done
easily, perhaps through the use of in-house engineers. Changes
involving more significant power changes and/or changes to transmitting
antennas may require more time and effort. For example, a number of
stations currently have a top-mounted analog antenna and a side-mounted
digital antenna, and to provide full digital service will need to re-
mount the digital antenna to the top of the tower. Also, if an entirely
new transmission line and/or antenna must be installed, additional time
will be needed to order the transmission line and antenna and have it
delivered to the site.)
23. Furthermore, some of these stations may have pending
applications with unresolved international coordination issues.
Licensees in this category with pending applications should consult
with the Commission staff about the timing for action on their
applications. In addition, they should coordinate with Commission staff
regarding necessary modifications to their applications that will
result in international approval. They may need to proceed with
constructing authorized facilities to the extent approved by Canada or
Mexico if the issues delaying action on their applications cannot be
resolved in time to allow construction to be completed before the end
of the transition. (These stations may be required to adjust their
transmitter power, their antenna location, their antenna design, or
some combination thereof.)
2. Category Two: Stations Returning to Their Analog In-Core Channel
24. There are 517 stations that will return to their current analog
in-core channel for post-transition operations, based on the proposed
new DTV Table. (This group of stations includes some analog singletons
and flash-cutters.) Stations in category two may face each of the
category one challenges involving tower construction, antenna
replacement or relocation, and transmitter replacement or power
adjustments.
25. In addition, these stations may need to determine whether they
can use any of their analog or digital transmission equipment (e.g.,
transmitter, transmission line or waveguide, and antenna). If a station
finds it has a transmitter that it could use, it will also need to
determine whether that transmitter can provide the appropriate power
level. It is our understanding that a station that is going to stay
within a spectrum band (low-VHF, high-VHF or UHF) and change its
frequency within 5 or 6 channels (36 MHz or less) will most likely
require fewer technical changes than if the change of broadcast
frequency is more than 6 channels. We expect that channel moves of
fewer than 5 or 6 channels may require only minor modifications to the
station's digital transmitter, whereas more significant changes may
require major modifications or an entirely new transmitter. We seek
comment on these assumptions.
26. Stations that will return to their current analog channel also
may need to determine whether their current analog
[[Page 37318]]
or DTV antenna can be used. Generally, the design, condition and
channel of operation of their current antennas, as well as the
stations' directional antenna characteristics established in the new
DTV Table Appendix B, as adopted, must be considered when these
stations evaluate the suitability of their antennas for post-transition
DTV operation. The ability of these stations to use an existing digital
antenna may depend upon how significant the change in channel numbers
will be for these stations as they move from their current DTV channel
back to their current analog in-core channel. It is our understanding
that channel moves of more than 5 or 6 channels will likely require a
new antenna and transmission line or new waveguide. We seek comment on
these assumptions.
27. These stations also must consider the impact on their analog TV
service, which might be disrupted entirely or limited in reach to a
smaller area during periods of work on the tower. For example, a
temporary reduction in coverage might be due to reduced power analog TV
operation at a backup site in order to facilitate construction on the
main tower facility.
3. Category Three: Stations Moving to a Completely New In-Core Channel
28. There are 117 stations that will move to a completely new in-
core channel for post-transition operations, based on the proposed new
DTV Table. These stations face similar challenges to those returning to
their analog (in-core) channel. In addition, these stations will need
to coordinate with other stations to complete their move. For example,
another station may occupy the relocating station's post-transition
channel or it may occupy an adjacent channel (located in the same or a
nearby area) to the relocating station's post-transition channel. Also,
these stations may find that their tower site cannot support three
antennas at once, as may be necessary to accommodate their current
analog and DTV operations while preparing for broadcasting on their
post-transition channel.
4. Singleton Stations
29. There are 137 stations that do not have a paired channel (i.e.,
stations that do not have both an analog and a digital channel), based
on the proposed new DTV Table. These stations are commonly referred to
as ``singletons.'' These stations fit in one of the preceding three
categories, but they may encounter different challenges and
circumstances that deserve special consideration in this review.
Specifically, for this discussion, ``singletons'' include (1) those
stations described in footnote 101 of the Second DTV Periodic Report
and Order as licensees that did not receive a second or ``paired''
channel to use during the transition to DTV; (2) those stations that
had a paired DTV channel and that we authorized to discontinue
providing analog TV service; (3) those paired-channel stations that
gave up their interim DTV channel pursuant to ``flash cut'' approval;
and (4) those paired-channel stations that we propose to allow to
``flash cut.'' Singletons include DTV and analog TV stations, and can
be unbuilt, operating at reduced facilities, or fully constructed and
licensed. Analog TV singletons will be flash cutting from broadcasting
on their analog channel to broadcasting on a digital channel. Flash-
cutting often will involve singletons ending their analog TV operation
and beginning their DTV operation on their current analog channel, but
in some cases will require that a station change to a new channel for
post-transition operation. Singleton stations, like those with paired
channels, are responsible to ensure that they have completed the
construction of their digital facilities by the February 17, 2009
deadline, except for stations whose initial CPs expire later. (Single-
channel stations receive a CP with a three-year construction period.
Thus, new stations whose CPs were granted after February 2006 will have
construction deadlines later than February 17, 2009.) After February
17, 2009, stations that have not constructed analog facilities may only
construct digital facilities on their post-transition channel.
30. Singleton licensees and permittees should have a post-
transition channel in the proposed new DTV Table and proposed
facilities specified in the proposed new DTV Table Appendix B, provided
such permittee status is announced by Public Notice before the order
establishing the new DTV Table is adopted. DTV singletons remaining on
their current DTV channel for post-transition operations face the same
challenges identified in category one above. These stations must
complete authorized construction consistent with the new DTV Table
Appendix B, as adopted. Stations that have done so and are operating
and licensed need not take any further steps at this time. DTV
singletons that have not completed construction must do so as discussed
below. A few DTV singletons are moving to different channels in the new
DTV Table, including some currently authorized for out-of-core
operations. In addition to the potential challenges described for
paired stations going to a new channel for post-transition operation
(category three in the preceding section), unbuilt DTV singletons must
complete their required construction by their CP expiration date,
whether that date is before or after the transition deadline.
31. Analog singletons that will remain on their currently
authorized channel for post-transition operations face the same
challenges identified in category two above. Unbuilt analog singletons
must also meet their CP expiration date requirements. Depending on the
time left for them to complete construction, most of these stations
should consider requesting that the Commission modify their
authorization to specify DTV operation, particularly stations that have
recently received CP grants. (Stations that receive a new CP and that
will remain on this channel for post-transition operations may either
construct their analog facilities (for use until the end of the
transition) or apply to the Commission for permission to construct a
digital facility on their analog channel for post-transition
operations.) Stations in this situation that choose to construct their
authorized analog broadcast facility for operation until February 17,
2009 should plan for its conversion to DTV when they purchase their
transmitter and antenna system.
32. Analog singletons moving to a new channel for post-transition
operations face the same issues identified in category three above.
Some also have a CP for their analog channel that expires either before
or after the transition deadline. Stations that have an analog CP
expiring before the transition deadline should consider applying for a
modification of their analog CP to make it easier to complete the
required analog channel construction while also building their post-
transition facility. They also should take steps to efficiently
complete this simultaneous dual-channel construction of both their pre-
transition analog and post-transition facilities (for example, having a
tower crew install both antennas at the same time or ordering an
antenna or transmitter that can be readily converted from analog
operation to DTV operation). They may also want to explore the
possibility of requesting that their single-channel analog
authorization be modified to specify pre-transition DTV operation on
their post-transition channel. Such a modification would require
interference protection to be provided to all potentially affected
stations and construction to be completed before the station's CP
expires. Stations whose
[[Page 37319]]
analog CP will expire after the transition deadline should consider
applying for a modification of their analog CP to specify the post-
transition facilities that they will need to complete before their CP
expires. As noted above, February 17, 2009 is the deadline for all
full-power television broadcast stations to end analog transmissions.
V. Issue Analysis
33. In this Third DTV Periodic Review, we consider how to ensure
that full-power TV broadcast stations complete their transition to
digital-only operations by the statutory deadline. Specifically, we
consider when stations may and must cease operating on their analog
channel, when stations may and must begin operating on their post-
transition channel, and what regulatory flexibility we can provide to
facilitate these efforts. By statute, stations must cease analog
operations by 11:59 p.m. on February 17, 2009. Stations, thus, should
have their digital facilities in place and ready to commence operations
no later than 12 a.m. on February 18, 2009.
34. We seek comment on what actions the Commission should take to
facilitate broadcasters' completion of the transition by the statutory
deadline. We seek comment on how to ensure that broadcasters (1)
complete construction of their post-transition facilities in a timely
and efficient manner; and (2) have in place (in-core) facilities that
can reach their viewers. In view of the statutory change from a soft to
a hard transition deadline, the Commission's focus has moved beyond
simply ensuring that stations are operating in digital. Our focus is
now on overseeing broadcasters' construction of their final, post-
transition channel with facilities that will reach viewers in their
authorized service areas by the time they must cease broadcasting in
analog.
35. We begin by proposing that every full-power television
broadcast station file a form with the Commission that details (1) the
current status of the station's digital transition; (2) the additional
steps, if any, the station needs to take to be prepared for the switch-
over deadline; and (3) a plan for how it intends to meet that deadline.
These filings will be posted on the Commission's website. We believe
that these forms will assist the Commission, industry, and the public
in assessing progress and making plans for the digital switchover date.
36. We also consider when stations may reduce their current (pre-
transition) television service in order to complete their transition.
Next, we consider the deadlines by which stations must construct and
operate their current DTV channels or lose interference protection--or
even authority to operate--on those channels. Third, we propose
deadlines for the construction and operation of post-transition
facilities and consider the ability of stations to transition early. We
also consider the steps necessary for broadcasters to construct and
operate their post-transition channels. Issues raised in this section
include the rules, procedures and interference standards for stations
to file applications for CPs to build their post-transition DTV
facilities and to request authorization to maximize their facilities.
Finally, we address other issues related to the DTV transition. (While
we recognize the Commission's rules for full-power television will need
to be updated to eliminate outdated references to analog and out-of-
core television service and clarify engineering issues that differ for
digital transmission and analog transmission, these housekeeping
matters will be addressed in a separate rulemaking in the DTV
proceeding. We, nonetheless, seek comment on whether resolution of any
housekeeping issues requires more immediate attention.)
A. Reduction and Termination of Analog Service
37. In this section, we consider the reduction and termination of
stations' analog TV service. Until February 17, 2009, the Commission's
rules require stations to continue operating their existing licensed
analog facilities. (Moreover, the public has a legitimate expectation
that existing broadcast services will be maintained.) To best achieve
their respective transitions, however, some stations may find it
desirable to reduce or terminate their analog operations before the
February 17, 2009 transition date. In some cases, stations may need to
reduce or end their analog service because such operations may impede
construction and operation of post-transition (digital) facilities.
Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to: (1) Stations
that would like to switch their side-mounted digital antenna with their
top-mounted analog antenna before the end of the transition; (2)
stations that need to add a third antenna to their tower but cannot do
so without reducing or ending analog service because the tower cannot
support the additional weight; and (3) stations that are terminating
analog service early as part of a voluntary band-clearing arrangement.
We seek comment on these and other circumstances where stations can
facilitate their transitions by reducing or terminating their analog
service in advance of the transition deadline.
38. Background. The Commission generally has not favored reductions
in television service. Proposals that would result in a loss in TV
service have been considered to be prima facie inconsistent with the
public interest, and must be supported by a strong showing of
countervailing public interest benefits. Consistent with this
precedent, the Commission allows stations to reduce their service from
that required by their licenses only upon an appropriate public
interest showing. Losses in service may be justified, for example, to
facilitate the station's transition to DTV. (The Commission has placed
a very high priority on accelerating the television industry's
transition to DTV.) The Commission is generally most concerned where
there is a loss of an area's only network or NCE TV service, or where
the loss results in an area becoming less than well served, i.e.,
served by fewer than five full-power over-the-air signals. In cases in
which a station seeks to reduce analog TV service, it can also use an
engineering analysis performed in accordance with the Office of
Engineering and Technology's OET Bulletin No. 69 (``OET 69'')
methodology to show that the area where service would be reduced is
area that is already terrain shielded such that viewers located in that
area do not actually receive the station's signal over-the-air now.
39. Notwithstanding the strong public interest in maintaining TV
service, the Commission does permit the early return of out-of-core (TV
channels 52-69) analog channels under certain circumstances in order to
facilitate the DTV transition. The Commission established policies to
facilitate voluntary ``band-clearing'' of the 700 MHz bands to allow
for the introduction of new public safety and other wireless services
and to promote the transition of out-of-core analog TV licensees to DTV
service inside the core TV spectrum. Generally speaking, these policies
provide that the Commission will approve voluntary agreements between
incumbent broadcasters and new licensees to clear the 700 MHz band
early if consistent with the public interest. The Commission has
approved several such requests to return out-of-core channels in
accordance with this band-clearing policy.
40. The Commission's 700 MHz band-clearing policies differ somewhat
depending on whether a station is located on TV channels 59-69, which
might affect use of the upper portion of the band, or on TV channels
52-58, which would only affect use of the
[[Page 37320]]
lower portion of the band. Envisioning the early recovery of TV
channels 60-69, the Commission established a ``rebuttable presumption''
favoring requests for voluntary band-clearing involving channels 59-69.
(The Commission established its policies on voluntary band-clearing for
TV Channels 59-69 in a series of orders. The Commission initially
stated that it would ``consider specific regulatory requests needed to
implement voluntary agreements'' between incumbent broadcasters and new
licensees to clear the Upper 700 MHz Band early, if consistent with
public interest. Next, the Commission established a rebuttable
presumption favoring the grant of requests that would both result in
certain specific benefits and avoid specific detriments. These policies
were further extended to ``three-way'' band clearing arrangements, in
which non-Channel 59-69 broadcasters were also potential parties.
Finally, the Commission provided certain additional flexibility to
facilitate voluntary agreements for early clearing and granted a
request for relief from two specific DTV-related requirements.) In
contrast, the Commission did not anticipate recovery of TV channels 52-
59 until after the DTV transition was complete and, as a result,
decided to consider requests for voluntary band-clearing involving
those channels on a case-by-case basis. In this case-by-case review,
the Commission considers whether grant of the request would result in
public interest benefits, such as making new or expanded public safety
or other wireless services available to consumers, especially in rural
or other underserved communities. The Commission weighs these benefits
against any likely public interest harms, such as the loss of any of
the four stations with the largest audience share in the designated
market area, the loss of the sole service licensed to the local
community, the loss of a community's sole service on a channel reserved
for NCE TV broadcast service, or a negative effect on the pace of the
DTV transition in the market.
41. Discussion. In light of the hard deadline for the cessation of
analog TV service, we believe the most significant public interest
objective should be to ensure that stations meet the transition
deadline. The original statutory provision requiring the termination of
analog broadcasts established December 31, 2006 as the last day for
analog operations, but allowed that deadline to be postponed if an 85
percent DTV reception benchmark was not reached in a given market. The
Commission's goal under this former approach was to increase DTV
operations as quickly as possible without causing significant analog
service loss. We believe, however, that Congress' adoption of the hard
deadline of February 17, 2009, now weighs in favor of an increasing
tolerance for the loss of analog service as we near the switch-over
date and where it will facilitate the transition.
42. Stations with Out-of-Core Analog Channels. As noted above,
stations that might affect the upper 700 MHz band (i.e., TV channels
59-69) can receive a ``rebuttable presumption'' favoring their requests
to terminate analog service. We believe the disparate band-clearing
treatment with respect to stations in the lower 700 MHz band (i.e., TV
channels 52-58) is no longer appropriate. The hard deadline applies
equally to both portions of the 700 MHz band. In addition, Congress has
mandated that the Commission begin the auction of recovered analog
broadcast spectrum in the 700 MHz band no later than January 28, 2008.
(The DTV Act unified the timing of auctions for the assignment of
remaining spectrum from TV Channels 52-69. The Communications Act now
requires the Commission to commence the auction of recovered analog
broadcast spectrum no later than January 28, 2008 and deposit the
proceeds of such auction in the Digital Television Transition and
Public Safety Fund no later than June 30, 2008.) Accordingly, we
propose to apply the same ``rebuttable presumption'' standard to
voluntary agreements for clearing TV channels 52-58 as now applies to
such agreements for clearing TV channels 59-69. (In other words, we
propose to apply the relaxed ``rebuttable presumption'' standard to all
out-of-core stations seeking to return their analog TV channels.)
Moreover, we propose to apply the relaxed ``rebuttable presumption'' to
out-of-core stations seeking to reduce rather than terminate their
analog service. Requests to reduce or terminate analog service would be
made in accordance with the Commission's rules. (Stations making
requests to reduce analog TV service should do so in accordance with
the rules to modify an existing license or authorization by using FCC
Form 301 (commercial stations) or FCC Form 340 (NCE stations). Stations
making requests to terminate TV service should do so in accordance with
the rules to modify an existing license or authorization and to
discontinue operations. Stations discontinuing only one service of
their paired license, however, should not return their license or
authorization, as would otherwise be required by 47 CFR 73.1750. In
addition, stations making requests to reduce service may, if more
applicable, instead apply for an STA pursuant to 47 CFR 73.1635.
Consistent with the rules for license modification and discontinuance
of operation, stations terminating their service may send a letter to
the Video Division of the Media Bureau and send an e-mail to
analog@fcc.gov in lieu of filing an application.) We seek comment on
our proposed treatment of out-of-core stations seeking to reduce or
terminate their analog service.
43. Stations with In-Core Analog Channels. In contrast to out-of-
core stations' return of their analog channels, in-core stations'
requests to reduce and terminate analog service have been less favored
to this point. We believe it may now be appropriate to examine the
circumstances under which we will allow in-core stations to reduce or
discontinue analog TV broadcasting. We seek comment on the factors and
circumstances we should consider when evaluating in-core stations'
requests to reduce or terminate their analog TV service before the
February 17, 2009 transition date. We invite comment on ways to ensure
that stations meet the statutory transition deadline, while still
minimizing the loss of TV service to consumers. If we permit early
reduction or termination of analog service, how do we ensure that the
public continues to have access to news and information, including
emergency and other public safety information during the transition?
44. First, with respect to a station requesting to reduce its
analog service--short of terminating its analog broadcasting, we seek
comment on whether we should establish a presumption that any reduction
in a station's analog TV service is in the public interest if:
(1) The proposed reduction is directly related to the construction
and operation of post-transition facilities and would ensure that the
station or another station can meet the deadline;
(2) The proposed reduction in analog service is less than five
percent of either the station's service area or its population served;
(3) The proposed reduction does not cause the loss of an area's
only top-four network or NCE TV service;
(4) The proposed reduction does not result in an unreasonable
reduction in the number of services available in that area; (We seek
comment on what that number of services would be. For example, the
Commission has previously been concerned where the loss results in an
area becoming less than well served, i.e., with fewer than five full-
power over-the-air signals. In
[[Page 37321]]
other contexts, such as the satellite context, we note that the
Commission has considered whether an area would become ``underserved,''
i.e., an area with two or fewer full-service stations. We propose to
allow stations to minimize the loss of service to their service area or
population and satisfy this condition through the use of analog
translators. As previously noted, the statutory deadline applies only
to full-power stations. Stations interested in the temporary use of
analog translators should file requests for STA in accordance with 47
CFR 73.1635.);
(5) The broadcast station proposing the reduction is able to
deliver its signal to cable and satellite providers so that the reduced
analog signal does not prevent cable and satellite carriage; and
(6) The broadcast station proposing the reduction commits to on-air
consumer education about the station's transition and how to continue
viewing the station.
We seek comment on the usefulness and timing of this proposal,
including whether there are other factors or situations where we should
presume that a reduction in service would be, or would not be, in the
public interest. For example, should we consider the level of cable and
satellite penetration in the areas that will lose over-the-air service?
We also seek comment on whether and, if so, how these factors should be
relaxed as we approach the DTV transition date. As noted above,
requests to reduce analog service would be made in accordance with the
Commission's rules.
45. If a station is unable to qualify for the above proposed
presumption, we propose to consider the station's request to reduce
analog TV service (on an in-core channel) on a case-by-case basis. We
invite comment on the appropriate showing and balancing of factors to
consider in such a case-by-case analysis. As above, we seek comment on
whether we should permit an increasing amount of analog TV service loss
the closer we get to the end of the transition. What information must
stations provide to demonstrate that reduced analog service would be in
the public interest? We would expect that our case-by-case analysis
would involve consideration of the factors discussed above. For
example, we believe that broadcasters must be able to deliver their
signals to cable and satellite providers so that reduced analog signals
do not prevent cable and satellite carriage. In addition, we believe
that broadcasters must also commit to on-air consumer education about
the station's transition and how to continue viewing the station. We
seek comment on these proposals.
46. Some broadcasters have side-mounted antennas and similar
problems that prevent them from completing the build-out of their
digital facilities while they are still operating their full analog
facilities. Such stations, if they are providing DTV service to 100
percent of their replication area, may want to wait until February 17,
2009 to move their digital antenna into its final position. This
approach may be acceptable provided there is a minimal disruption of
service after the deadline due to post-deadline construction
activities. We seek comment on this approach and urge each station
operating under these circumstances to consider how much of their
replicated area is served by their side-mounted digital antenna. It is
critically important that analog over-the-air viewers who obtain the
necessary digital receivers (whether TV sets or D-to-A converters) are
able to receive DTV service over-the-air upon expiration of the
deadline for the transition on February 17, 2009. If it is necessary
for stations to reduce analog service before the transition to be sure
all viewers have digital service on and after the transition date, we
will consider such requests.
47. With respect to a station requesting to terminate its analog TV
service on an in-core channel, we seek comment on whether and, if so,
under what conditions we would permit such an action. We would expect
to apply a stricter standard to the early termination of analog in-core
service than to a reduction in service. We believe our analysis of
requests to terminate analog service would at least involve
consideration of the relevant factors discussed above for a reduction
of service. We seek comment on this proposal, and also on whether we
should require a station requesting termination of analog in-core
service to demonstrate that a reduction in service is an unacceptable
alternative. As noted above, requests to terminate in-core analog
service would be made in accordance with the Commission's rules.
B. Return of Pre-Transition DTV Channel; Flash Cut Requests
48. In this section, we consider whether and, if so, when to allow
additional stations to return their pre-transition-only DTV channel
(i.e., a DTV channel that is not their final, post-transition channel)
and flash cut at or before the transition deadline from their current
analog channel to their post-transition channel. The Second DTV
Periodic Report and Order permitted stations in certain situations to
surrender their pre-transition DTV channel, operate in analog on their
analog channel, and then flash cut to digital by the end of the
transition on their post-transition channel. As the Commission noted,
the potential public interest benefits of flash cuts include freeing
the station to focus its efforts on completion of its post-transition
channel and the creation of opportunities for the provision of public
safety and other wireless services on the pre-transition DTV channel.
Based on the criteria established in the Second DTV Periodic Report and
Order, the Media Bureau has approved the flash cut requests of numerous
stations. In this Third DTV Periodic Review, we consider expanding the
range of circumstances in which we will allow stations to flash cut.
49. Background. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the
Commission permitted satellite stations to flash cut because of their
unique status and circumstances and provided for these stations to
notify the Commission of their decision to flash cut by their initial
channel election deadline. (TV satellite stations are full-power
broadcast stations authorized under Part 73 of the Commission's rules
to retransmit all or part of the programming of a parent station that
is typically commonly owned. Unlike full-service stations, satellite
stations have chosen to forego or relinquish full-service status and
instead retransmit the programming of a parent station because full-
service operation of the satellite facility is not economically viable.
Eligible satellite stations were assigned a paired DTV channel in the
current DTV Table. The Second DTV Periodic Report and Order recognized
that most satellite stations operate in small or sparsely populated
areas that have an insufficient economic base to support full-service
operations.) The Commission stated that satellite stations opting to
flash cut would retain their interference protection (defined in the
proposed new DTV Table Appendix B) as if they had met the applicable
replication/maximization build-out requirements.
50. The Commission also permitted stations with out-of-core DTV
channels to flash-cut under certain conditions and required
notification of their decision to flash cut by their initial channel
election deadline. The Commission presumed that granting such requests
would be in the public interest if the station demonstrated that (1) it
was assigned an out-of-core DTV channel, and (2) grant of the request
would not result in the loss of a DTV channel affiliated with one of
the four largest national television networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, or Fox).
(The
[[Page 37322]]
Commission has ``relied on affiliates of the four largest national
television networks to achieve the necessary milestones throughout the
DTV transition.'' The Commission also noted that the presumption is
neither conclusive nor dispositive and that special circumstances
raised by the resulting loss of digital broadcast service could rebut
the presumption.) In the case of requests that did not meet these
criteria, the Commission stated that it would consider all the relevant
public interest factors in deciding whether to approve the request.
These factors include the advancement of the provision of wireless and
public safety services, the acceleration of the DTV transition, and the
loss of broadcast service. Like satellite stations, full-service out-
of-core stations that are permitted to flash cut would retain their
interference protection (defined in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as
adopted) as if they had met the applicable replication/maximization
build-out requirements. The Commission also stated in the Second DTV
Periodic Report and Order that stations would not be eligible to flash
cut if they ``have been denied an extension of the construction
requirements and admonished because they failed to demonstrate that
they are meeting the necessary criteria for an extension and have not
come into compliance.''
51. The Media Bureau recently approved by Public Notice the flash
cut requests of 32 stations based on the criteria established in the
Second DTV Periodic Report and Order. These stations were approved to
turn off or discontinue construction of their pre-transition DTV
channel. In addition, the Public Notice invited any other station to
flash cut if it meets the criteria established in the Second DTV
Periodic Report and Order.
52. Discussion. We seek comment on whether and, if so, under what
circumstances we should accept new requests by stations to return their
pre-transition DTV channel before the end of the transition and ``flash
cut'' from their analog channel to their post-transition channel (which
must be different from their pre-transition DTV channel). (Stations may
continue to obtain flash cut approval pursuant to the Second DTV
Periodic Report and Order and Flash Cut PN.) For instance, we seek
comment on the following factors: (1) Whether the DTV station is
operating on TV channels 52-69; (2) whether the station is affiliated
with one of the four largest national television networks (ABC, CBS,
NBC, or Fox); (3) whether the station's pre-transition DTV channel is
allotted to another station for post-transition use and the station's
return of the channel will facilitate the other station's construction
of its post-transition digital facility; and (4) the station's
financial hardship. We invite comment on these criteria and on other
criteria that may be relevant. We encourage commenters to address the
public's desire to continue to receive DTV signals that are currently
available and the impact that allowing stations to turn off pre-
transition DTV signals would have on the successful and timely
completion of the transition. We also seek comment on the impact of
this proposal on cable and satellite subscribers. Consistent with the
decision in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, stations that
have been admonished by the Commission for failure to meet their
construction deadline would not qualify to flash cut.
C. Construction Deadline for Full, Authorized DTV Facilities
53. In light of the short amount of time remaining before the
transition deadline, it is critical that stations finalize construction
of their post-transition facilities expeditiously to ensure the
provision of TV broadcast service to the public when analog
transmissions cease. In this section, we consider whether to require
stations to continue construction of pre-transition channels that are
not going to be used by the station after the transition. We also
consider the deadline by which we will require TV broadcast stations to
complete construction of their post-transition facilities.
54. As discussed below, we are proposing to adopt a different
approach for the remainder of the transition with respect to deadlines
for construction of DTV facilities and interference protection. Until
now, a primary focus of the Commission has been to facilitate the
initiation of DTV service to the public during the transition. This
approach was designed, in part, to accomplish the goal of completing
the transition by the December 31, 2006 ``flexible'' deadline
originally established by Congress, which allowed for exceptions to the
deadline. (Guided by this statutory directive, the Commission
established construction deadlines and ``use or lose'' policies that
provided incentives to stations to provide DTV service during the
transition, which in turn gave viewers an incentive to purchase
equipment that would enable them to view these signals.) Now that
Congress has established a ``hard'' deadline for completion of the
transition, with no exceptions, we believe our emphasis should shift
toward ensuring that DTV stations will be providing service on their
final, post-transition channels by that date. In general, we now must
focus on striking the appropriate balance between the public interest
in assuring that post-transition channels are fully constructed by
February 17, 2009, and the public interest in pre-transition digital
and analog service. These, like other issues raised in this NPRM,
require careful self-assessment by licensees to determine how best to
serve the public while at the same time making efficient use of the
resources available (manufacturing capacity, tower crews, etc.)
available to them.
55. Previous Construction Deadlines and Use or Lose Policies. As
discussed above, the DTV construction schedule adopted by the
Commission in 1997, provided for varying construction deadlines based
on the size of the market and type of station, with all stations
required to construct by May 1, 2003. (Under this schedule, television
stations in the 10 largest TV markets and affiliated with the top four
television networks (ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC) were required to build DTV
facilities by May 1, 1999. Stations affiliated with those networks in
television markets 11 through 30 were required to construct their DTV
facilities by November 1, 1999. All other commercial stations were
required to construct their DTV facilities by May 1, 2002, and all
noncommercial stations were to have constructed their DTV facilities by
May 1, 2003.) In 2004, the Commission established two deadlines by
which stations were expected to either replicate or maximize DTV
service on their current (pre-transition) DTV channel or lose
interference protection to the unserved areas on that channel. By July
1, 2005, top-four network affiliates in the top 100 markets were
required to fully replicate or maximize if they will remain on their
DTV channel after the transition. If these stations will move to
another channel post-transition, they were required to serve at least
100 percent of their replication service population by July 1, 2005. By
July 1, 2006, all other stations were required to fully replicate and
maximize if they will remain on their current DTV channel after the
transition. If they will move to another channel post-transition, they
were required to serve at least 80 percent of their replication service
population by July 1, 2006. The Commission stated that stations that
met the applicable ``use-or-lose'' deadline and that are going to move
to a different channel after the transition would be permitted
[[Page 37323]]
to carry over their authorized maximized areas to their new channels.
In addition, these ``use-or-lose'' replication/maximization deadlines
became the new deadlines for stations operating temporary DTV
facilities pursuant to STA to complete construction of their licensed
DTV facilities. (In 2001, the Commission temporarily deferred (until
the Second DTV Periodic Review) the establishment of construction
deadlines for these stations, provided they constructed initial DTV
facilities designed to serve at least their communities of license.)
Approximately 80 percent of the stations in each of these categories
met their respective deadlines.
56. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the Commission
noted that certain stations had not yet been granted an initial DTV
construction permit. The Commission required that, by August 4, 2005,
all such stations construct and operate ``checklist'' facilities that
conform to the parameters of the DTV Table and other key processing
requirements. The Commission stated that it would consider requests for
waiver of the August 4, 2005 deadline on a case-by-case basis, using
the criteria for extension of DTV construction deadlines.
(``Checklist'' facilities have power and antenna height equal to or
less than those specified in the DTV Table and are located within a
specified minimum distance from the reference coordinates specified in
the DTV Table. Because these facilities comply with the interference
requirements specified in the rules, no further consideration of
interference is required. In addition, because the DTV Table has been
coordinated with Canada and Mexico, ``checklist'' facilities generally
do not require further international coordination.)
57. In two separate orders adopted subsequent to the adoption of
this NPRM, the Commission addressed applications filed by stations for
extensions of time to construct DTV facilities and/or waivers of the
deadline by which stations must build DTV facilities in order to retain
the ability to carry over interference protection to their post-
transition channel (so-called ``use or lose'' waivers). In the
Construction Deadline Extension Order, the Commission considered 145
requests for an extension of time to construct a DTV facility. For 107
stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is the same as their post-
transition channel, the Commission granted these applications and gave
these stations an additional six months from the release date of the
Construction Deadline Extension Order in which to complete
construction. For 29 stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is
different from their post-transition channel, the Commission granted
these applications and gave these stations until 30 days after the
effective date of the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of the rules
adopted in the Report and Order in this Third DTV Periodic Review
proceeding in which to complete construction. In the Use or Lose Order,
the Commission considered 192 requests for waiver of the ``use or
lose'' deadlines. For 102 stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is
the same as the station's post-transition DTV channel, the Commission
granted these stations a waiver and gave them an additional six months
from the release date of the Use or Lose Order in which to complete
construction. For 38 stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is
different from the station's post-transition channel, the Commission
granted these stations a waiver and gave them until 30 days after the
effective date of the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of the rules
adopted in the Report and Order in this Third DTV Periodic Review
proceeding in which to complete construction. In both of these orders,
the Commission reminded stations that the hard deadline for termination
of analog TV service prevents consideration of any request for
extension of full-power analog TV service beyond that date. The
Commission advised stations given an extension or waiver to utilize
this time to take all steps possible to complete construction as
further extension or waiver requests may be evaluated under a more
stringent standard. We intend to treat similarly any stations that have
a construction permit for which the original time to complete
construction has not yet expired. These stations still have time
remaining on their original construction permit to complete the build-
out of their pre-transition DTV facilities or they may have had their
original construction permit extended and the extended deadline has not
yet expired. Thus, these stations are not addressed in the Construction
Deadline Extension Order or Use-or-Lose Order. These stations should
continue to follow existing rules and procedures (i.e., continue to
build their current DTV CP and, if that CP expires before they have
completed construction, file a request for extension of the CP). Once
final rules are adopted in this proceeding and become effective,
stations will be subject to the new rules, including changes to Section
73.624(d).
58. Revised Construction Deadlines and Use or Lose Policy. Going
forward, we propose to establish construction deadlines for DTV
facilities that vary based on a station's channel assignments for pre-
and post-transition operation and other circumstances affecting the
station's ability to complete final, post-transition facilities. We
believe this revised approach will best permit stations to focus their
efforts on completing construction of final, post-transition facilities
in the time remaining before the end of the transition. In conjunction
with this approach, we propose to tighten the standard by which we
evaluate future requests for extension of time to construct a DTV
facility. In addition, with respect to construction deadlines of
February 17, 2009 or later, we propose to evaluate all requests for
additional time to construct under the ``tolling'' standard currently
applied to analog broadcast TV stations and DTV singleton stations.
59. In this section, we consider construction deadlines for
differently situated stations. First, we consider stations whose post-
transition channel is different from their pre-transition DTV channel.
These are stations that will be starting over with a new channel for
DTV service. Second, we consider stations whose post-transition channel
is the same as their pre-transition DTV channel. Unlike the first
group, these are stations that have long been assigned the channel that
they will use for post-transition operations. Third, we consider
stations in other situations, including those facing unique technical
challenges. Finally, we consider alternatives that might afford
stations with regulatory flexibility. We seek comment on the proposed
deadlines and tentative conclusions below, and also seek comment on
alternative deadlines for these stations.
1. Stations Whose Post-Transition Channel is Different From Their Pre-
Transition DTV Channel
60. For stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is different from
their post-transition channel, we propose not to require further
construction of their pre-transition DTV channel and propose to
establish February 17, 2009 as the deadline by which these stations
must complete their final, post-transition facilities. These stations
face a greater challenge than stations that will remain on the same DTV
channel for post-transition operations. Stations moving to a new
channel must apply for a construction permit on that channel and build
new facilities based on the channel allotments in the new DTV
[[Page 37324]]
Table Appendix B, as adopted. Our proposal is designed to give stations
facing the challenges associated with moving to a new DTV channel the
maximum possible time to complete their post-transition facilities
before analog transmissions must cease. We seek comment on this
approach, and on whether an earlier construction date would still be
appropriate in some circumstances.
61. With the establishment of the hard deadline, we believe the
focus must turn to facilitating stations' efforts to construct their
permanent DTV facilities that will be used to provide service after the
transition. Therefore, at this stage in the DTV transition, we propose
to allow a station to terminate further construction of its pre-
transition DTV channel if this channel is not the station's post-
transition channel. We request comment on this proposal. We believe
that requiring stations to build or expand facilities that would only
be operated until the end of the transition--i.e., for less than two
years--potentially could undermine the larger public interest objective
of ensuring a timely transition to digital broadcasting by diverting
limited resources from what is a far more important goal: The
construction of final, post-transition facilities.
62. At the same time, however, we recognize that many stations
whose pre-transition DTV channels are not the channels they will
operate on post-transition have been diligent in meeting the deadlines
established by the Commission for completing construction of their pre-
transition facilities in order to provide DTV service to the public and
to be permitted to carry over interference protection to their
permanent DTV channel. It is not our intent to treat these stations
unfairly or reward stations that have been less diligent in providing
DTV service during the transition. However, as noted above, it is
critical at this juncture to focus on the completion of final DTV
facilities. In order to accomplish this goal, we believe we must permit
stations to cease investing time and resources in completing facilities
that will be used for the remainder of the transition simply in order
to retain interference protection on their final, post-transition
channels. Instead, we need to ensure that stations are focused on
finalizing their post-transition facilities now to ensure service to
the public when analog transmissions cease.
63. Accordingly, we propose to change our ``use or lose'' policy
for stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is not their post-
transition channel as follows. For such stations that received either
an extension of their construction deadline in the Construction
Deadline Extension Order or a waiver of their use-or-lose deadline in
the Use or Lose Order (i.e., until 30 days after the effective date of
the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of the rules adopted in the Report
and Order in this Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding), we propose
that these stations will not lose protection to their post-transition
channels. We note that many stations that have not built their
transitional facilities have faced recognizable impediments to doing
so. In addition, most of these stations that have applied for an
extension of time to construct and/or a waiver of the applicable use-
or-lose deadline have had those requests granted, indicating that they
were found to have a valid reason not to have met the applicable
deadline. Thus, we do not believe that allowing stations that faced
such impediments to retain interference protection on their final,
post-transition facility unfairly rewards these stations. We seek
comment on this approach. We specifically invite comment on the effect
of this proposal on stations moving to a different DTV channel for
post-transition operations that have fully complied with their use-or-
lose deadlines and construction permit build-out requirements.
64. Under our proposal here, stations with a pre-transition DTV
channel that is not the same as their final, post-transition channel
have the following options. We request comment on our proposal,
discussed below.
65. Pre-Transition DTV Channel Unbuilt or Not in Operation. We
propose to permit a station that has not constructed an operational
pre-transition DTV facility to elect simply to return its CP for that
facility to the Commission and focus its efforts on construction of its
post-transition facility. Thus, a station that has either not begun
construction of its pre-transition DTV facility or has not begun
operating that facility, and will be moving to a different channel at
the end of the transition, may return the CP for that facility to the
Commission. As stations in this situation are not currently providing
digital service to the public, we believe it is appropriate at this
stage in the transition to allow these channels to be returned. We
request comment on this approach. Stations electing this option would
be required to obtain flash cut approval in accordance with the
proposals discussed in section V.B., supra. Stations electing this
approach would be able to carry over interference protection to their
post-transition channel, as noted above.
66. Pre-Transition DTV Channel in Operation. Stations with
operational DTV facilities on a pre-transition channel may have several
options. Under each of these options, we propose to permit a station to
carry over interference protection to its post-transition channel, as
noted above.
First, stations may discontinue further construction on
their pre-transition DTV facility and to operate the facility they have
constructed at this point during the remainder of the transition while
they focus on construction of their permanent DTV facility. We propose
to permit these stations to file an application to modify their
existing CP to match their pre-transition DTV facility in accordance
with the Commission's rules. The station would then continue operation
of the facility for the remainder of the transition without devoting
resources to further build-out of that facility.
67. Second, stations may be permitted to cease operating their pre-
transition DTV facility in certain circumstances. We propose that these
stations must obtain flash cut approval in accordance with the
proposals discussed in section V.B., supra.
Third, stations may decide they would like to continue
construction of their full, authorized DTV facility on their pre-
transition channel. While we do not want to deny stations in this third
category the opportunity to continue to build pre-transition DTV
facilities and to provide service on these facilities for the remainder
of the transition, we believe it is appropriate to require that these
facilities be completed expeditiously. Accordingly, for stations in
this third category, we propose to permit the station to continue to
build its pre-transition DTV facility, but will require that
construction be completed by the deadline established for them in the
Construction Deadline Extension Order or in the Use or Lose Order
(i.e., 30 days after the effective date of the amendments to Section
73.624(d) of the rules adopted in the Report and Order in this Third
DTV Periodic Review proceeding).
2. Stations Whose Post-Transition Channel Is the Same as Their Pre-
Transition DTV Channel
68. Many stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is the same as
their post-transition channel have already made substantial progress
toward construction of facilities that will be used to provide service
after the transition. Specifically, they have already constructed their
full,
[[Page 37325]]
authorized DTV facilities in accordance with their existing CP or
license and the Commission's previous build-out requirements
established in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order. Some of these
stations have built DTV facilities that match those defined in the
proposed new DTV Table Appendix B and are, therefore, now ready for
post-transition operations. (We remind stations of their continuing
obligation to notify the Commission concerning changes in their
facilities. Stations are expected to comply with the rules and may
refer to adjustments in their facilities as described in the new DTV
Table in their comments in this docket. To the extent that stations
still need to modify their authorization, we propose to require them to
file an application, as discussed below in section V.D. In addition, as
we propose below, applications that match or closely approximate but do
not exceed their new DTV Table facilities will be eligible for
expedited processing.) Other stations whose pre-transition DTV channel
is the same as their post-transition channel have built their full,
authorized DTV facilities in accordance with their existing CP or
license but for some reason these facilities do not match those
facilities defined in the proposed new DTV Table Appendix B. (Stations
may have certified facilities that were authorized by CPs they have not
yet constructed, or that they requested in pending applications that
have been held up by international coordination issues, or that are
based on replication that their current CP or license does not exactly
achieve. Stations may also have modified their CP or license since they
filed their certification so that their currently authorized coverage
no longer provides an exact match to their certified coverage.) These
stations will need to file an application for a new CP or an
application for modification of CP to change their facilities to match
those facilities defined in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as adopted.
We discuss below, in section V.D., the process by which stations must
file such applications.
69. Other stations with the same pre- and post-transition DTV
channel have not yet constructed their full, authorized DTV facilities.
Some of these stations currently have a CP for their full, authorized
DTV facility, some are operating reduced facilities pursuant to an STA,
and some may not have constructed at all. These stations must complete
construction and, in some cases, may have to apply for a new CP or for
modification of their CP to receive authorization for facilities that
match the facilities defined in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as
adopted.
70. It is possible that a station with the same pre- and post-
transition channel does not want to complete construction of its full,
authorized facilities as described in the new DTV Table Appendix B.
These stations must apply to modify their existing CP or license to
reflect the facility they intend to construct or have constructed.
71. For stations whose post-transition channel is the same as their
pre-transition DTV channel, we propose that the deadline to complete
construction of their final, DTV facility is the deadline established
for them in the Construction Deadline Extension Order or Use or Lose
Order (i.e., six months from the release date of those orders). For
these stations, we believe it is appropriate to require that they
complete construction of their final DTV facility by this deadline
because they have already had a significant period of time in which to
build their post-transition facilities and, indeed, should already have
these facilities constructed. Unlike stations that will be moving to a
different DTV channel for post-transition use, these stations have
generally had the advantage of being able to plan for and commence
construction of their post-transition facilities for more than 10
years. In contrast, stations moving to a different channel for post-
transition operations have only recently been assigned their new
channel and thus are only now able to apply for a construction permit
for this channel and commence construction of their post-transition
facilities.
72. We invite comment on this approach. In particular, we invite
comment on whether there are stations in this group that must apply for
a new or modified CP because their current CP does not match the
facilities specified in the proposed new DTV Table Appendix B. Are the
changes in the CP such that little, if any, of the equipment necessary
for the facility for which they currently have a CP could be used in
the facility specified in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as adopted? If
we were to give these stations more time to construct, should we do so
only where the difference between the facilities specified on the
current CP and those defined in the proposed new DTV Table Appendix B
is significant? If so, how should we define a ``significant''
difference in this context?
3. Other Situations
73. In this section, we separately discuss the proposed treatment
of stations with side-mounted digital antennas or facing other
circumstances whereby the operation of the station's analog service
prevents the completion of the station's full, authorized post-
transition facility as defined in the proposed new DTV Table Appendix
B. We also discuss the treatment of stations granted a waiver of the
August 4, 2005 ``checklist'' deadline and stations denied an extension
of time to construct a pre-transition DTV facility or a ``use or lose''
waiver request.
74. Stations Facing Unique Technical Challenges. In the
Construction Deadline Extension Order, the Commission granted the
extension applications of four stations because these stations faced
unique technical challenges (e.g., side-mounted antenna-related issues)
preventing them from completing construction of their DTV facilities.
Most of these stations proposed to install their DTV antenna on the top
of the tower where their existing analog antenna currently is housed.
In order to top-mount the DTV antenna, these stations would have to
relocate the analog antenna to another position on the existing tower
or to another location altogether. These stations were granted an
extension until February 17, 2009 to complete construction of their DTV
facilities. Similarly, in the Use or Lose Order, the Commission
identified 45 stations that have come close to meeting the applicable
replication or maximization requirements but cannot fully satisfy those
requirements because of unique technical challenges associated with
operation of their analog, as well as construction of their digital,
facilities. Some of the stations in this latter group are stations with
top-mounted antenna issues; others include stations whose local power
company cannot provide sufficient electrical capacity to the tower site
to power both analog and full power digital operations, and stations
that do not have space at their antenna site for both analog and
digital equipment. These stations were granted a similar waiver of the
``use or lose'' deadline.
75. For the 49 stations referenced above that were granted an
extension request or ``use-or-lose'' waiver because they faced unique
technical challenges, we propose that the deadline for these stations
to complete construction of their final, DTV facility is the deadline
established for them in the Construction Deadline Extension Order or
Use or Lose Order (i.e., February 17, 2009). In general, we established
pre-transition DTV construction deadlines, and have proposed post-
transition construction deadlines herein, based on whether a particular
station was going to use its pre-transition DTV channel for post-
[[Page 37326]]
transition operations. However, in the Construction Deadline Extension
Order or Use or Lose Order, we did not rely on this distinction because
stations with a top-mounted antenna issue face a unique and
insurmountable impediment to construction (i.e., they cannot put both
an analog and a DTV antenna on top of the same tower). Accordingly, we
propose to give all such stations until February 17, 2009 to complete
their final, post-transition facilities. We also anticipate that these
stations will take advantage of approaches proposed herein in the
section concerning reduction in analog service prior to the end of the
transition to facilitate construction of final, DTV facilities. We seek
comment on this approach.
76. Stations Granted Waivers of the ``Checklist'' Deadline. In the
Use or Lose Order, the Commission granted 10 requests for waiver of the
August 4, 2005 deadline established for all television stations to
construct and operate a ``checklist'' DTV facility. For four of these
stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is the same as their post-
transition channel, the Commission granted these stations a
``checklist'' waiver and gave them an additional six months from the
release date of the Use or Lose Order in which to complete construction
and begin operation of their ``checklist'' facilities. For six of these
stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is different from their post-
transition channel, the Commission granted these stations a
``checklist'' waiver and gave them until 30 days after the effective
date of the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of the rules adopted in the
Report and Order in this Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding in which
to complete construction and begin operation of their ``checklist''
facilities.
77. We propose for these stations an approach dependent upon
whether their pre-transition DTV channel is the same as, or different
than, their post-transition channel. For the six stations granted
``checklist'' waivers whose pre-transition DTV channel is different
than their post-transition channel, we propose to apply the procedures
outlined at section V.C.1., supra, for stations that are moving to a
different channel post-transition. Thus, for these stations we propose
not to require further construction of their pre-transition DTV
facility and propose to establish February 17, 2009 as the deadline by
which these stations must complete their final, post-transition
facilities. (In the Use or Lose Order, these stations were granted a
waiver of the ``checklist'' deadline until 30 days after the effective
date of the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of the rules adopted in the
Report and Order in this Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding.) These
stations may cease further construction of their pre-transition
facility. They may decide to operate the facilities they have
constructed on their pre-transition channel for the remainder of the
transition and, if so, they should apply to license those facilities
and, if they do so, they would not be required to request further
extensions of time to construct in order to retain full interference
protection to their post-transition DTV channel. Alternatively, these
stations could elect to pursue the options outlined in section V.A.,
supra, concerning reduction in analog service prior to the end of the
transition. For the four stations granted ``checklist'' waivers whose
pre-transition DTV channel is the same as their post-transition
channel, we propose to apply the procedures outlined above at section
V.C.2., supra, for stations with the same pre- and post-transition
channels. Thus, these stations must complete their full, final post-
transition facility by the deadline established in the Use or Lose
Order (i.e., six months from the release date of the Use or Lose
Order). Any request for extension of time to construct beyond that date
will be considered under the stricter extension criteria proposed
herein. We invite comment on these proposals.
78. Stations Denied An Extension of Time to Construct. In the
Construction Deadline Extension Order, the Commission denied the
extension applications of five stations, admonishing three of these
stations for their continuing failure to timely construct and affording
these stations additional time to comply with the DTV construction
rule. The one admonished station whose pre-transition DTV channel is
the same as its post-transition channel was afforded six months from
the release date of the Order to comply with the DTV construction rule,
while the two admonished stations whose pre-transition DTV channel is
different from their post-transition channel were afforded until 30
days after the effective date of the amendments to Section 73.624(d) of
the rules adopted in the Report and Order in this Third DTV Periodic
Review proceeding. All three admonished stations were also made subject
to the remedial measures for DTV construction adopted by the
Commission. For these admonished stations, we propose that we will not
consider any future requests for extension of time to construct pre-
transition facilities. We note that the Construction Deadline Extension
Order admonished these stations and subjected them to remedial measures
and noted that the stations could be subject to additional sanctions if
they do not comply with the measures and requirements set forth in that
Order. In that regard, we propose that for the station who was
admonished and whose pre-transition DTV channel is the same as its
final, post-transition channel, if such station does not complete
construction of its DTV facility by the deadline established in the
Construction Deadline Extension Order, the station would be subject to
additional remedial measures, such as but not limited to the loss of
its pre-transition channel, the loss of its ability to carry over to
its post-transition channel interference protection for the area
unserved by its pre-transition facility, and the issuance of
forfeitures. For the other two admonished stations, whose pre-
transition DTV channel is not the same as their post-transition
channel, because these stations have been denied an extension of their
construction deadline and have been required to follow remedial
procedures, we believe it is appropriate to treat these stations more
strictly than stations that have met the current standard and been
granted an extension of the construction deadline. However, we believe
requiring these two stations to build their pre-transition channel
would be inconsistent with the policy advanced throughout this document
to shift our focus to construction of post-transition facilities.
Therefore, we propose that these stations will not be required to
construct their pre-transition facilities but will remain admonished
and on a remedial program with respect to construction of their post-
transition facilities. If these stations fail to meet the construction
deadline established for their post-transition facilities, we propose
that these previously admonished stations would also be subject to
additional remedial measures similar to those applicable to stations
whose pre-transition channel is the same as their post-transition
channel (e.g., the issuance of forfeitures). We request comment on
these proposals. Our proposals here are not intended to conflict with
the Construction Deadline Extension Order or the remedial measures or
possible sanctions mentioned therein, but instead propose additional or
alternative consequences for failure to construct by the applicable
deadline.
79. Stations Denied a Waiver of the Use or Lose Deadline. In the
Use or Lose Order, the Commission determined that
[[Page 37327]]
seven stations were unable to show that good cause existed to allow
them additional time to meet their applicable ``use or lose'' deadline
and, thus, were denied their ``use or lose'' waiver requests. Because
these stations failed to meet the applicable replication/maximization
requirements, they lost interference protection to the unused portion
of the associated coverage area. In addition, these stations lost the
ability to ``carry over'' their interference protection to their
unserved DTV service area on their post-transition channel. We remind
these stations that, with respect to their pre-transition channel, they
must submit an application to modify their DTV construction permit to
specify their reduced facilities, as directed in the Use or Lose Waiver
Order. Nevertheless, we recognize that the proposals in this NPRM
deemphasize the requirement that stations construct DTV facilities that
will not be used for post-transition operations. Therefore, we seek
comment on whether we should reevaluate the loss of interference
protection for these stations with respect to their post transition
channel.
4. Extension/Waiver of DTV Construction Deadlines
80. In light of the deadline for completion of the digital
transition and in view of the changes proposed above to our
construction deadline and use or lose policies, we believe it is
appropriate at this time to consider the standard that should apply
generally for grant of an extension of time to construct DTV facilities
pre-transition. (This new standard will not apply to digital LPTV
facilities.)
81. Under the current rules, the Media Bureau may grant a six-month
extension of time to construct a DTV station if the licensee or
permittee can show that the ``failure to meet the construction deadline
is due to circumstances that are either unforeseeable or beyond the
licensee's control where the licensee has taken all reasonable steps to
resolve the problem expeditiously.'' The rules state: ``[s]uch
circumstances shall include, but are not limited to (A) [i]nability to
construct and place in operation a facility * * * because of delays in
obtaining zoning or FAA approvals, or similar constraints; (B) the lack
of equipment necessary to obtain a digital television signal; or (C)
where the cost of meeting the minimum build-out requirements exceeds
the station's financial resources.'' (To qualify under the financial
resources standard, the applicant must provide (1) an itemized estimate
of the cost of meeting the minimum build-out requirements; (2) a
detailed statement explaining why its financial condition precludes
such an expenditure; (3) a detailed accounting of the applicant's good
faith efforts to meet the deadline, including its good faith efforts to
obtain the requisite financing and an explanation why those efforts
were unsuccessful; and (4) an indication when the applicant reasonably
expects to complete construction.) These rules apply to stations
granted a paired license for analog and digital operation during the
transition. The Bureau may grant no more than two extension requests
upon delegated authority. Subsequent extension requests must be
referred to the Commission.
82. We propose to revise and tighten this standard for extension of
DTV construction deadlines to ensure that stations complete their DTV
facilities and commence operation. The current standard was adopted
early in the DTV transition process when stations were first trying to
build digital facilities and applies only to stations with a paired
license. The standard was revised to include consideration of financial
resources at a time when broadcasters were still trying to meet the
initial construction deadlines. At this point in time, however, the
initial construction deadlines for DTV facilities passed several years
ago and the deadline for completion of the transition is less than two
years away. We believe that stations at this stage in the transition
must finalize their construction plans and implement them. We
tentatively conclude that we should revise Section 73.624(d)(3) of the
rules, which sets forth the standard for extension of DTV construction
deadlines, to make that provision substantially stricter. Specifically,
we propose to eliminate Section 73.624(d)(3)(ii)(B), which permits
consideration of circumstances related to the lack of equipment
necessary to obtain a digital television signal in the evaluation of
whether to grant a request for extension of time to construct. At this
point in the transition, we believe stations have had ample time to
order the equipment required to provide digital service and do not
believe it is necessary or appropriate to grant stations additional
time to construct because of equipment delays, absent extraordinary
circumstances. We also propose to revise Section 73.624(d)(3)(ii)(C),
which permits consideration of circumstances where the cost of meeting
build-out requirements exceeds the station's financial resources.
Specifically, in seeking a DTV extension, we propose that the licensee/
permittee of a station may show that it is (1) the subject of a
bankruptcy or receivership proceeding, or (2) experiencing severe
financial hardship, as defined by negative cash flow for the past three
years. (Our proposed showing of three years of negative cash flow is
similar to the showing considered in determining whether a station is a
``failed station'' for purposes of a waiver of our local TV ownership
rules. However, we do not intend to use the failed station standard in
its entirety as applied in the context of local TV ownership in
determining whether a station should be granted an extension of time to
construct under our revised extension standard.) Thus, we propose to
eliminate the existing four-part test for financial hardship and
replace it with a new test. Stations seeking an extension based upon
financial considerations would either (1) submit proof that they have
filed for bankruptcy or that a receiver has been appointed, or (2)
submit an audited financial statement for the previous three years. All
such stations also would be required to submit a schedule of when they
expect to complete construction. We seek comment on this proposal. In
particular, we seek comment on how this proposal should be applied to
noncommercial educational stations, whose financial circumstances often
differ from those of commercial stations.
83. Again, at this stage in the transition we believe all stations
have had considerable time to address financial issues related to
completion of their digital facilities and further consideration of
such issues in connection with a request for additional time to
construct should be limited to a situations like bankruptcy or
receivership where a court generally controls the station's finances,
or where the station can demonstrate severe financial hardship as
discussed above. Thus, going forward, requests for extension of time to
construct related to lack of equipment or the cost of meeting the
build-out requirements other than where the station is in bankruptcy or
receivership or is facing severe financial hardship as discussed above
will not generally be granted.
84. However, we will continue to consider going forward requests
for extension of time where the station is awaiting action by the
Commission or a court on a pending application or appeal or where
action on an application is being delayed for other reasons beyond the
station's control, such as reasons related to international
coordination. We will consider delays due to international coordination
where resolution of the international coordination issue is truly
beyond the
[[Page 37328]]
control of the station, such as where the failure to obtain
coordination will not permit the station to construct facilities
sufficient to replicate its analog coverage area. A station seeking to
maximize that cannot obtain international coordination for such
facilities may be required to construct facilities with a smaller
coverage area. In addition, we will continue to consider circumstances
related to an act of God or terrorism. We will revise 47 CFR 73.624(d)
and FCC Form 337, accordingly, and will continue to require that any
request for extension of time be filed electronically using the revised
form. We propose to apply the revised rule concerning requests for
extension of time to build DTV facilities to all requests for extension
of construction deadlines occurring prior to February 17, 2009. This
revised rule would apply, inter alia, to those stations whose pre-
transition DTV channel is the same as their post-transition channel and
that were granted extensions or waivers in the Construction Deadline
Extension Order or the Use or Lose Order. We recognize that some
stations may request further extensions of time to build and that other
stations, whose deadlines have not yet expired, may request extensions
of deadlines once their deadlines expire. We tentatively conclude that
we will apply the revised rule to any requests that are pending at the
time the revised rule becomes effective. We seek comment on these
proposals and on this tentative conclusion. (We note that DTV singleton
stations that were not eligible for a paired license for analog TV and
DTV operation during the transition are not currently governed by 47
CFR 73.624(d)(3). These DTV singleton stations are currently subject to
the tolling provisions of 47 CFR 73.3598(b) and we propose that these
stations continue to be subject to the provisions of that section.)
85. We note that while we propose to establish a stricter standard
for requests for extension of time to construct DTV facilities, we are
also proposing, as discussed above, to eliminate the requirement for
some stations that they build pre-transition DTV facilities on channels
that are not their post-transition channel. Taken as a whole, we
believe these proposed changes will help many stations facing financial
challenges to complete construction of DTV facilities while also
ensuring that broadcasters continue to focus on the timely construction
of the facilities necessary to end analog transmission by February 17,
2009.
86. Post-transition we intend to take a different approach with
respect to requests for additional time to construct DTV facilities.
While the transition to digital broadcasting was underway, analog
broadcasting remained the primary method by which the vast majority of
American consumers received over-the-air television. As a result, while
it was important to the transition that stations begin transmitting a
digital signal, it was not critical to the ability of over-the-air
viewers to view broadcast television that they do so. Accordingly, our
extension criteria permitted grant of extensions of time to construct
DTV facilities based on a number of different criteria. Once the nation
moves to an all-digital broadcast service, however, we believe that
application of a stricter ``tolling'' standard for additional time to
construct is appropriate. Once DTV is the sole broadcast service, we
believe requests for additional time to construct should be treated as
we now treat such requests for all analog stations and DTV singletons.
87. Specifically, for all requests for additional time to construct
DTV facilities for construction deadlines occurring February 17, 2009
or later, we tentatively conclude that we will consider such requests
under the tolling standard set forth in Section 73.3598(b) of our
rules, which currently applies to DTV singletons and analog TV
stations, as well as AM, FM, International Broadcast, low power TV, TV
translator, TV booster, FM translator, FM booster, and LPFM stations.
Section 73.3598 provides that the period of construction for an
original construction permit shall toll when construction is prevented
due to an act of God (e.g., floods, tornados, hurricanes, or
earthquakes), the grant of the permit is the subject of administrative
or judicial review (i.e., petitions for reconsideration and
applications for review of the grant of a construction permit pending
before the Commission and any judicial appeal), or construction is
delayed by a cause of action pending in court related to requirements
for construction or operation of the station (i.e., zoning or
environmental requirements). The rule further provides that a permittee
must notify the Commission of any event covered under the provision and
provide supporting documentation in order to toll the construction
deadline. Permittees are also required to notify the Commission when a
relevant administrative or judicial review is resolved. Tolling
resulting from an act of God automatically ceases six months from the
date of the notification to the Commission unless the permittee submits
additional notifications at six-month intervals detailing how the act
of God continues to cause delays in construction and describing any
construction progress and the steps the permittee has taken and
proposes to take to resolve any remaining impediments. Section 73.3598
further provides that any construction permit for which construction
has not been completed and for which an application for license has not
been filed shall be automatically forfeited upon expiration without any
further affirmative cancellation by the Commission. (The Commission has
noted that there may be rare and exceptional circumstances, other than
those delineated in its rules or decisions adopting the rules, that
would warrant the tolling of construction time, i.e., other
circumstances in which a permittee is prevented from completing
construction within the time specified on its original construction
permit for reasons beyond its control such that the permittee would be
entitled to tolling of the construction time under 47 U.S.C. 319(b). In
these very limited circumstances, the Commission noted that it would
entertain requests for waiver of its strict tolling provisions.) We
seek comment on this approach. (We will consider further amendments
after the transition is completed to eliminate rules that were adopted
only for the construction of DTV stations during the transition. As
part of that effort, we may eliminate 47 CFR 73.634(d)(3) and instead
rely, as proposed herein, on 47 CFR 73.3598(b) for all construction, as
we do today for the broadcast services. We also note that these
proposals are for the full-power stations subject to the February 17,
2009 deadline. The rules pertaining to low power, translator and Class
A stations will be the subject of another proceeding.) We also invite
comment on whether it is necessary to amend Section 73.3598(a) to
specify ``DTV'' or if the existing reference to ``new TV'' in this
section will be adequate in conjunction with the clarification provided
by the Order to be adopted in this proceeding. We also seek comment on
whether we should afford small television broadcasters additional time
to construct DTV facilities. (The Small Business Administration defines
a television broadcast station as a small business if such station has
no more than $13.5 million in annual receipts; 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS
Code 515120. We note that small TV stations, as well as larger
stations, must terminate analog broadcasting by February 17, 2009, and,
therefore, should have their digital facility completed by that date.)
[[Page 37329]]
88. We note that, under the current rules applicable to DTV
stations, the Commission has permitted a station to justify an
extension request if the Commission has not acted on the station's
modification application. Under the tolling standard we propose to
apply to all construction deadlines February 17, 2009 and later, the
filing of an application for modification of a construction permit
would not be grounds for tolling of the construction deadline. We
believe that transitioning DTV stations to the rule applicable to
construction of analog TV and all other broadcast stations in this
regard is appropriate post-transition. However, we propose that delays
due to international coordination would not generally be grounds for
tolling of a DTV construction permit with two exceptions. First, the
Commission would toll a construction permit for a DTV station where the
station could demonstrate that a request for international coordination
had been sent to Canada or Mexico on behalf of the station and no
response from the country affected had been received. Second, the
Commission would toll a DTV construction permit where the station could
demonstrate that the DTV facility approved by Canada or Mexico would
not permit the station to serve the viewers currently served by the
station's analog facility that would also be served by the station's
digital facility approved by the Commission. We seek comment on these
proposals and other changes to Section 73.3598.
5. Early Transition
89. Some stations that are moving to new post-transition channels
(i.e., not operating on either of their pre-transition channels) may
want to begin operating on those new channels before the transition
date. We seek comment from stations in this category on whether they
believe they permissibly could operate on their post-transition channel
before the February 17, 2009 deadline for terminating analog
transmissions. We also invite comment on the potential benefits of
early transition and the impediments that may exist. We believe that
early transition could advance the transition if it provided improved
DTV service and freed transition resources for those stations building
later. Under what circumstances will stations be able to transition
early without causing impermissible interference to another station
(analog or digital)? We seek comment on whether there are any
incentives we can or should provide to stations to operate on their
post-transition channel early. We propose to allow early transition,
provided such operations would not cause impermissible interference to
another station. Consistent with our transitional interference
protection policies, we propose that early transitioning stations must
not cause more than 2.0 percent interference to any authorized analog-
only TV station. Stations interested in transitioning early should
indicate their intent to do so in their CP or modification applications
for post-transition facilities. (We are proposing to revise FCC Forms
301 and 340 to allow stations to simultaneously apply for both pre- and
post-transition facilities.) Because we tentatively conclude that
stations cannot expand beyond their facilities defined in the new DTV
Table Appendix B, as adopted, we believe early transitioning stations
cannot cause additional interference to post-transition operations. We
also propose to permit such stations to commence early post-transition
operations that may be less than their full, authorized facilities,
provided impermissible interference is not caused to another station
(analog or digital). Broadcasters seeking to commence early post-
transition operations would need to indicate whether doing so will
result in a loss of their own analog or digital service and, if so, how
they plan to address that loss in service. As discussed above in the
analog service loss context, we seek comment on whether (and if so to
what extent) a loss of service should be acceptable if it would help
facilitate the transition. We seek comment on these proposals.
6. Additional Proposals to Provide Regulatory Relief
90. Alternative Buildout. We seek comment on whether to permit
stations to request an STA to build less than their full, authorized
post-transition facilities by the relevant construction deadline,
provided these stations at least serve the same area and population
that receives their current analog TV and DTV service so that over-the-
air viewers will not lose TV service. Could such a proposal facilitate
the transition without undermining viewers' over-the-air reception
expectations after the transition date? We would apply the new
construction deadlines and standard adopted in this proceeding for
additional time to construct to the construction of such intermediate
facilities that would meet the service requirement. If we adopt such a
proposal, when must these stations construct their full, authorized
post-transition facilities? If we do not afford such relief generally,
should we afford such relief to small television broadcasters because
of unique challenges they may face in completing their transition?
91. Temporary Use of In-core Pre-Transition DTV Channels. We
believe that some stations that are returning to their analog channel
or moving to a new channel for post-transition operations may be able
to temporarily remain on their in-core pre-transition DTV channel and
provide adequate service after the transition date without causing
impermissible interference to other stations or preventing other
stations from making their transition. We propose to afford these
stations with this opportunity if doing so would facilitate their
transition. We propose to allow these stations to choose to temporarily
remain on their pre-transition DTV channel if:
(1) They serve at least the same area and population that receives
their current analog TV and DTV service so that over-the-air viewers
will not lose TV service. (Stations must ensure that consumers served
pre-transition that obtain a D-to-A converter box through the NTIA
program or who otherwise purchase DTV receiver equipment will be
capable of receiving off-the-air DTV signals post-transition.); and
(2) They do not cause impermissible interference to other stations
or prevent other stations from making their transition. We tentatively
conclude that the 0.5 percent interference standard proposed for post-
transition operations in section V.F.1., below, would apply because
such operations would occur after the transition deadline.
We seek comment on this proposal. We propose for stations to make
such requests in accordance with the rules for STA. We believe
affording such regulatory flexibility to these stations will facilitate
the transition. We seek comment on this proposal, including its
usefulness to stations and on whether it is consistent with the
statutory transition deadline. (We note that out-of-core DTV stations
are prohibited by statute from remaining on their original allotted DTV
channel after the transition deadline. Therefore, this flexibility
would not apply to DTV stations operating out-of-core.) Can a station
readily determine whether its continued operation after February 17,
2009 on its pre-transition DTV channel would interfere with another
station's transition or operation? If we adopt this proposal, how long
should we allow stations to remain on their in-core pre-transition
channel and when must these stations construct their full, authorized
post-transition facilities? (Whatever post-transition construction
deadline is
[[Page 37330]]
established for these stations, we propose to apply the new tolling
standard adopted in this proceeding.) What effect would this proposal
have on the operation of DTV receiver equipment, including D-to-A
converter boxes? (It is our understanding that whenever a station
changes channels, an over-the-air viewer using a D-to-A converter box
(or DTV tuner-equipped set) will have to manually rescan for available
channels in order to receive that channel.) Finally, we seek comment on
the implications of our proposal with respect to the adoption of the
new DTV Table.
92. Channel Priority. We recognize that there may be some
situations where a station's ability to commence its post-transition
operations will be dependent on another station's construction and
operating plans. For example, station A may need to begin testing its
digital facility on its post-transition channel 11 in order to be ready
to operate after the transition date, but station B is currently using
the channel for pre-transition (analog or digital) service. In such
situations, close cooperation will be needed between these stations. We
expect that broadcasters will make all possible accommodations to
ensure that all stations will be able to provide digital service on
their post-transition channels at the transition date. Stations are
reminded that their authority to operate on a pre-transition channel,
whether analog or digital, ends on February 17, 2009, unless they have
applied for and been granted authority to remain on a pre-transition
channel. We seek comment on whether and, if so, what steps the
Commission should take to ensure a smooth transition in these
circumstances.
D. Applications to Construct or Modify DTV Facilities
93. Stations that need to request authority to construct or modify
their post-transition facilities must file CP or modification
applications (i.e., FCC Form 301 or 340). (The 634 stations that need
to construct their post-transition facilities because they will not be
using their currently authorized DTV channel for post-transition
operations are expected to file after the DTV Table is adopted. Any of
the 1,178 stations that will use their currently authorized DTV channel
for post-transition operations but need to change their facilities
because they do not have an authorization for their intended operations
should also file an application. For example, a station that intends to
operate its post-transition facility pursuant an existing STA operation
must file an application to modify its CP. Also, some of these stations
may need to apply to increase power or otherwise adjust their
facilities because they are now operating under STA at reduced power
and they are unable to construct their authorized CP facilities, but
intend to operate with more than their current STA facilities (for
example, they intend to raise their transmitting antenna to a higher
height on their tower, but are unable to mount it at the authorized
height). Other stations may need to apply to modify their licensed or
CP facilities in order to better reach their new DTV Table coverage if
such was based on a certification that differs from their current
license or CP (for example, more than 200 stations staying on their
pre-transition DTV channel certified to replication facilities and
their currently authorized licenses or CPs are unlikely to exactly
match the new DTV Table facilities that are derived from the
replication coverage). Stations that already have a license to operate
or a CP to construct their post-transition channel that matches their
new DTV Table facilities do not need to file any additional CP
applications. This group includes those stations discussed in paragraph
17 that will use their currently authorized DTV channel for post-
transition operations and that will use facilities that exactly match
those defined in the new DTV Table. These stations are building their
post-transition facilities on the CPs granted for pre-transition
operation. Once they have completed construction, they should file for
a license to cover (FCC Form 302) as required by 47 CFR 73.3536.
Stations may file an application to modify their authority on their
current DTV channel at any time, provided they do not violate the terms
of the Commission's filing freeze. (On August 3, 2004, the Media Bureau
imposed a freeze on requests for changing DTV channels within the DTV
Table and on new DTV channels, as well as on the filing of modification
applications by television and Class A television stations, in order to
provide a stable database for conducting the channel election process
and developing a new DTV Table. The freeze does not prevent the
processing of pending applications.) Stations that have a license to
operate or a CP to construct the facilities they want to retain for
post-transition use should file applications if their licensed
facilities or CP do not match the proposed new DTV Table Appendix B
unless they have previously filed comments to amend the Table or
Appendix B in the Seventh FNPRM, MB Docket No. 87-268. (The facilities
defined in the proposed new DTV Table were intended to allow stations
to serve geographic areas based on licensees' certification forms (FCC
Form 381) and, in some cases, on conflict resolution forms (FCC Form
383 and 385). If the DTV facility that a station intends to license for
post-transition operation did not match the facilities described in the
proposed new DTV Table, but does match the facility in the revised new
DTV Table when adopted, the station need not file an application.)
Appendix D to the NPRM lists the stations that are ready for post-
transition operations and do not need to apply for a CP or modification
based on current records. We invite comment on this list and whether
there are stations that should be added or deleted.
94. Filing Requirements. Commercial stations that need to construct
or modify their post-transition facilities must file FCC Form 301 for a
minor modification and submit the appropriate fee. (Applications to
construct or modify post-transition facilities specified in the new DTV
Table involve a minor change in facilities and we will process them
accordingly. 47 CFR 73.3572(a)(1) defines a major change in a
television station's facilities as any change in frequency or community
of license. Several stations may be changing channels as a result of
the channel election process; however, these stations will be applying
for the frequency and community of license assigned to them in the new
DTV Table that will be established in the Report and Order in MB Docket
No. 87-268, so we will treat their applications as not involving a
change in frequency. We believe this treatment will speed processing.
We also note that this is consistent with our implementation of the
initial DTV Table in 1998. NCE stations must file FCC Form 340. We
propose that stations must limit their applications to those facilities
specified in the new DTV Table Appendix B, as adopted. Pursuant to this
proposal, applications requesting facilities that would serve a larger
area than stations' new DTV Table Appendix B facilities would not be
accepted at this time. Because the new DTV Table will have resolved the
interference conflicts raised during the channel election process, we
believe we would be able to process these applications without having
to conduct interference analyses and without having to consider whether
any applications are mutually exclusive. We seek comment on this
proposal. Specifically, we seek input from any stations that may be
unable to build precisely the facilities specified in the new DTV Table
Appendix B (for
[[Page 37331]]
example, if an antenna producing the exact antenna pattern is not
available). If such stations are prohibited from expanding beyond their
DTV Table Appendix B facilities (as proposed infra in section V.E.),
will they instead be required to reduce their facilities so
significantly that they will be unable to provide adequate service? If
so, should we allow stations that fall into this situation to expand
beyond their DTV Table Appendix B facilities to the extent necessary to
address the difference between the theoretical facilities specified in
the new DTV Table Appendix B and the actual facilities which they are
able to build?
95. Expedited processing. It is each station's responsibility to
ensure that it can begin operations on its post-transition channel upon
expiration of the deadline for the transition on February 17, 2009. (We
note that some stations may need to complete their facilities
significantly before February 17, 2009, because, for example, they will
not be able to build during the winter months.) Thus, stations have a
great incentive to promptly file their applications as soon as possible
in order to have the maximum time to order equipment and build their
facilities. Stations also have the responsibility to file their
applications in sufficient time before the deadline so that they may be
granted by the Commission. In order to provide further incentive for
stations to timely file applications for their post-transition
facilities, we propose to process expeditiously certain applications,
provided they are filed no later than 45 days after the effective date
of Section 73.616 of the rules adopted in the Report and Order in this
proceeding. Stations whose channel assignments or facilities are not
finalized at that time will receive expedited processing if they file
their applications no later than the deadline specified in their
individual channel resolutions. We believe this application filing
deadline of 45 days after the effective date of Section 73.616 of the
rules adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding will give
stations ample time to prepare for these filings and to complete
construction prior to the deadline. (The 45-day application deadline
will not become effective until OMB approval is obtained for the filing
of these applications.) Specifically, we propose to offer expedited
processing to stations that timely apply for a CP to build their post-
transition channel, provided that their application (i) does not seek
to expand the station's facilities beyond its new DTV Table Appendix B
facilities; and (ii) specifies facilities that match or closely
approximate those new DTV Table Appendix B facilities (i.e., if the
station is unable to build precisely the facilities specified in the
new DTV Table Appendix B, then it must apply for facilities that
deviate no more than five percent from those Appendix B facilities with
respect to predicted population). We believe we can quickly determine
which stations are applying for facilities that do not extend in any
direction beyond their DTV Table Appendix B facilities and then
expeditiously review those stations' applications without conducting a
significant interference analysis because those applications will
either match or closely approximate their DTV Table Appendix B
facilities. Further, we believe the creation of this process will allow
us to grant qualified applications expeditiously, generally within 10
days of filing. We remind stations that expedited processing does not
mean they will receive an expeditious grant. (Stations that receive
expedited processing are not guaranteed that their application will be
granted; the application still must satisfy the criteria on Form 301
(or 340 for NCEs), as revised in this proceeding. Similarly, stations
that do not qualify for expedited processing will not necessarily have
their applications denied; rather, their applications simply will not
be processed on an expedited basis.) Applications that receive
expedited review but that are not readily grantable by the Commission
will require further action by the station. (In addition to the
proposed requirements discussed, an application cannot be granted
unless certain other criteria are met. These include certifying that
the proposed facility: (1) Will not have a significant environmental
impact; (2) will serve the principal community of license; (3) will
provide necessary protection to radio astronomy installations and FCC
monitoring stations; and (4) has had its tower approved by FAA, if
necessary.) We seek comment on this proposal. We also seek comment on
alternative methods to streamline the application process.
96. Revisions to FCC Form 301 and 340. To accommodate filings
related to stations' post-transition facilities, we propose to modify
the FCC Forms 301 and 340, as attached. The form changes will allow
stations to indicate that they are applying for post-transition
facilities. They also will facilitate the expedited processing
discussed above. We seek comment on our proposed forms and if
additional changes to the forms are needed.
97. Program tests/License to Cover CP. Stations must not commence
program tests on their post-transition channels until they are ready to
begin post-transition operations under program test authority. Stations
that want to conduct program tests on their post-transition facilities
must comply with the Commission's rules and coordinate with any
affected stations when they do the testing. Each station is responsible
for determining which other stations may be affected and coordinating
accordingly. We expect that stations will work together cooperatively
to facilitate testing. Upon completion of the construction of a
television facility as authorized by a CP, a station may commence
program tests upon notification to the Commission, provided that an
application for a license to cover the CP for the post-transition
facility, on FCC Form 302, is filed within 10 days, along with the
appropriate fee. (Stations must comply with the terms of their CP as
well as the technical provisions of the application, or rules and
regulations, and the applicable engineering standards. We remind
stations that will be using Channel 14 for post-transition operations
that they must take special precautions to avoid interference to
adjacent spectrum land mobile radio service facilities before
commencing program testing. Where a TV station is authorized and
operating prior to the authorization and operation of the land mobile
facility, a Channel 14 station must attenuate its emissions within the
frequency range 467 to 470 MHz if necessary to permit reasonable use of
the adjacent frequencies by land mobile licensees.) We do not believe
any rule changes are necessary here.
E. Expanding Facilities
98. During the channel election process, stations defined their
post-transition facilities, deciding whether they would (1) replicate
their allotted facilities, (2) maximize to their currently authorized
facilities, or (3) reduce to a currently authorized smaller facility.
Stations, however, were not allowed to seek facilities that would
expand their coverage areas beyond that authorized by a license, CP or
STA. This was precluded by the Commission's freeze on the filing of
maximization applications in order to provide a stable database for
developing the new DTV Table.
99. We recognize that stations may want to apply to expand their
facilities to serve a larger area than defined in the new DTV Table
Appendix B, as adopted. Stations' new channel assignments may present
them with new opportunities to offer expanded DTV coverage, either
because the
[[Page 37332]]
stations may be moving to a new channel that does not have the same
interference restrictions or because other stations on adjacent
channels may be moving away, thus eliminating prior interference
conflicts. It may save some stations time and money if they are able to
file only one application for expanded facilities.
100. We believe, however, that we must first ensure that all
stations can at least provide digital service to their analog viewers
by the transition date before considering new maximization
applications. We thus tentatively decide not to allow stations to apply
for expanded facilities at this time. We propose to consider the issue
of expanded facilities after all stations have had an opportunity to
apply for their facilities as specified in the new DTV Table Appendix
B. We seek comment on this approach and on our tentative conclusions.
We also invite comment on ways in which stations could seek expanded
facilities at this time without delaying the transition or
overburdening the scarce resources needed by other stations to
transition.
F. Interference Standards
101. Although we have proposed, above, not to allow stations to
apply to maximize their facilities at the same time that we will be
accepting applications for construction permits for the new DTV Table
Appendix B facilities, we do intend to allow stations to apply for
maximization once it is appropriate to do so. At that point, we will
need to have our post-transition interference standards in place. In
addition, it is our understanding that knowing what those post-
transition interference standards will be in advance may enable
stations to anticipate future equipment needs and allow them to
minimize their capital expenditures by buying equipment that can be
used both now and in the future. (We cannot provide any guarantees
regarding whether and/or to what extent any particular broadcaster may
be able to expand their facilities in the future.) Accordingly, we
believe it is appropriate at this time to propose what those post-
transition interference standards will be. In this section, we consider
interference protection methodologies and requirements for application
processing, as well as for rulemaking petitions to add a new DTV
allotment or change the channel of an existing allotment.
102. In adopting the initial DTV Table in the 1997 Sixth Report and
Order, the Commission concluded that it would apply geographic spacing
standards in determining whether to permit the addition of DTV
allotments in the Table. (47 CFR 73.623(d) specifies the minimum
geographic spacing requirements for DTV allotments not included in the
initial DTV Table. 47 CFR 73.623(c) sets forth the criteria for
applications to modify assignments in the initial DTV Table, including
the thresholds of desired-to-undesired (D/U) ratios at which
interference is considered to occur. 47 CFR 73.622(e) defines a DTV
station's service area as the geographic area within the stations'
noise-limited F(50,90) contour where its signal is predicted to exceed
the noise-limited service level. The F(50,90) designator indicates that
a specified field strength necessary for the provision of DTV service
is expected to be available at 50 percent of the locations 90 percent
of the time. A station's noise-limited contour is computed using its
actual transmitter location, ERP, antenna HAAT, and antenna radiation
pattern.) The Commission noted that geographic spacing provides a clear
and simple measure of acceptability of an allotment proposal without
the need to engage in extensive analysis of interference and has been
used successfully in the television service for many years. (The
Commission considered but ultimately rejected an alternative approach
whereby a party requesting an addition to, or modification of, the DTV
Table would be required to show that a station operating at the maximum
permissible ERP and antenna height on the proposed allotment would not
exceed the engineering interference criteria with regard to any other
existing allotment.) The Commission recognized, however, that
engineering criteria may allow more efficient use of the spectrum and
stated it would revisit the allotment criteria at an appropriate point
later in the DTV transition process. The Commission also determined in
the Sixth Report and Order that a party applying for a modification of
the DTV Table would need to show that its proposed modification would
not result in any new predicted interference to other DTV allotments or
existing NTSC stations, based on the engineering technical criteria
used to develop the initial DTV Table. On reconsideration, the
Commission replaced this no new interference standard with a de minimis
standard pursuant to which stations may make changes in their operation
where the requested change would not result in more than a 2.0 percent
increase in interference to the population served by another TV or DTV
broadcast station, and provided that the protected station is not, or
will not be, receiving interference in excess of 10 percent of its
population from all combined interfering stations. This de minimis
standard for permissible new interference was adopted to provide
flexibility for broadcasters in the implementation of DTV by allowing
additional opportunities for stations to maximize their DTV coverage
and/or service by increasing power and/or making other changes in their
facilities.
103. The Commission has also relied on other interference standards
in the DTV context. For example, applicants seeking facilities
modifications of full-service NTSC stations are allowed to cause a 0.5
percent margin above a prediction of no reduction in the population
served by a DTV station to account for rounding and calculation
tolerances. Applicants for analog TV translator and low power TV
(``LPTV'') stations must propose facilities that do not exceed
specified threshold D/U ratios at a DTV station's noise-limited contour
or at all points within the noise-limited area in the case of adjacent
channel stations proposing to locate inside the DTV noise-limited
contour. (Similarly, a licensee requesting DTV facilities modifications
that would expand its station's service area in any direction must meet
D/U protection requirements at the protected contour of Class A TV
stations authorized on the same or first adjacent channel. In all cases
in which the interference standard is based on signal contour
protection, applicants are permitted to base requests to waive the
standard on the DTV protection standards and methodology in 47 CFR
73.623(c).) In addition, in the channel election process that led to
the proposed new DTV Table for post-transition operation, an
interference conflict was determined to exist when it was predicted
that more than 0.1 percent new interference would be caused to another
station. (New interference was considered to constitute a conflict when
the new interference affected more than 0.1 percent of the population
predicted to be served by the station in the absence of that new
interference. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the
Commission permitted the 0.1 percent additional interference limit to
be exceeded on a limited basis in order to afford stations with an out-
of-core DTV channel to elect to operate its post-transition station on
its in-core analog channel.)
1. Proposed Interference Criteria
104. When evaluating applications to construct post-transition
facilities, we propose to use an interference protection requirement
based on
[[Page 37333]]
engineering criteria (e.g., permissible interference) rather than a
geographic spacing requirement. We believe this will allow for a more
flexible design of proposed stations while offering a high level of
protection to existing authorized service. By their nature, geographic
spacing requirements do not take into account intervening terrain
features (or the lack of such features). Stations separated by the same
distance may create significant mutual interference in areas of flat
terrain while no interference is predicted in circumstances where
intervening terrain limits the signals from either or both stations.
Where authorized DTV stations wish to change their assigned DTV channel
through a rulemaking petition, we also believe applying the proposed
engineering criteria is appropriate. On the other hand, we continue to
believe that geographic spacing requirements represent a preferred
approach for evaluating a petition for rulemaking requesting a new DTV
allotment. In such new allotment cases, information about actual
transmitter site locations and facilities are generally not available.
We propose to apply an engineering criteria approach in all cases
involving applications and to use geographic spacing requirements only
for rulemaking petitions seeking new DTV channel allotments. We seek
comment on these proposals and tentative conclusions, as well as on
alternative methods of providing interference protection.
105. Our proposed engineering criteria to evaluate all post-
transition applications would limit the predicted interference that a
station may cause to 0.5 percent of the protected station's service
population. This proposed 0.5 percent interference standard is stricter
than the 2 percent/10 percent criteria that has applied since early in
the DTV transition. The 2 percent/10 percent rules were established in
order to accomplish the difficult task of accommodating every existing
TV station with a second channel for DTV operation within the spectrum
already allocated for TV broadcasting and heavily used in some areas.
As indicated above, the Commission initially adopted a stricter ``no
interference'' standard, but on reconsideration recognized that
stations would need flexibility as they attempted to implement their
second channels in this congested spectrum environment. The flexibility
provided under the 2 percent/10 percent standard allowed many stations
to propose increased coverage, helping to provide DTV signals to more
viewers early in the transition.
106. In addition, we note that our 0.5 percent proposal is not as
strict as the 0.1 percent new interference criterion that was employed
for determining interference conflicts in the channel election process.
107. Our proposed requirement that interference from a DTV
application for post-transition use not exceed 0.5 percent is the same
requirement as we have used during the transition for analog TV
stations protecting DTV stations. It can be viewed as a ``no new
interference'' criteria when the amount of predicted interference is
rounded to the nearest whole percent (i.e., any determination of less
than 0.5 percent interference would be considered to be 0 percent,
while an interference determination greater than 0.5 percent would
round up to 1.0 percent.) This level of rounding is more reflective of
the accuracy of the interference prediction model than the 0.1 percent
criterion. (The 0.5 percent allowable predicted interference level is
also used for Class A TV stations protecting DTV stations pursuant to
47 CFR 73.6013 and for determination of LPTV and TV translator
protection of full service DTV.)
108. Because our proposed 0.5 percent interference limit is
significantly less than the 2 percent limit that we now use, we do not
believe it is necessary to continue to impose the 10 percent cap on
total interference from all sources. (In the initial DTV Table, the
Commission necessarily exceeded the 10 percent limit with respect to a
significant number of stations. In contrast to the initial Table, the
new Table will not be as congested because stations will be returning
one of their paired channels.) The new DTV Table has fewer stations
than the initial Table that exceed the 10 percent limit and many of
those stations elected their proposed channel knowing that the amount
of interference would exceed that amount. In lieu of the 10 percent
component of the current standard, we propose to limit the total
interference any station would receive from all sources by requiring
that stations already predicted to cause more than 0.5 percent
interference to another station will not be allowed to increase the
interference they are authorized to cause. (For example, an application
would not be granted for a station that is authorized to cause 1.8
percent predicted interference if the facilities proposed in the
application are predicted to raise the amount of interference caused to
1.9 percent.)
109. We seek comment on our proposals to limit permissible
interference to 0.5 percent and to not allow any increase in situations
where the amount of interference currently caused exceeds 0.5 percent,
as well as on any other methods to limit total interference. Does 0.5
percent reflect the right balance between protecting established DTV
service and affording adequate flexibility to stations seeking to
establish post-transition operations? Would another amount be more
appropriate?
110. We propose to evaluate compliance with the 0.5 percent
standard using the Office of Engineering and Technology's OET Bulletin
No. 69 (``OET 69'') methodology, but using 2000 census data as was done
during the channel election process. (The more up-to-date population
data from the year 2000 census was used to provide a more accurate
indication of the station service and impacts of interference on that
service than the older year 1990 population data used in computing the
service data for the initial DTV Table.) We seek comment on whether
other changes to the OET 69 methodology are necessary here. For
example, the standard OET 69 analysis evaluates ``cells'' within a
station's coverage area which are squares 2 kilometers on a side. We
have generally allowed applicants to specify analysis based on cells
that are smaller because such analysis is arguably more accurate. As a
result, we understand that some applications have been based on
evaluating many possible smaller cell sizes until the desired result is
obtained. (For example, if an application would fail based on 1.0 km
cells but passes based on 1.5 km cells, the applicant would request
evaluation based on the 1.5 km cell size.) Such ``shopping'' for
advantageous cell sizes does not improve the accuracy of the
evaluation. Should standards for allowable smaller cell sizes be
established (for example only allowing 1.0 km or 0.5 km cell sizes to
be requested)?
111. We also note that, in other proceedings, we have received
comments that it may be useful to adopt variable D/U ratios for
adjacent channel interference depending upon the received signal levels
predicted for the desired signals because the D/U interference ratios
employed for upper and lower first-adjacent channels are based on test
results for weak desired signal strengths and may produce inaccurate
predictions where the interfering station is located in an area that
receives a strong desired signal strength. Thus, we seek comment on
whether a change should be adopted to
[[Page 37334]]
reflect this concern in situations where adjacent-channel transmitters
are proposed to be located inside a desired station's noise-limited
service contour. (Such situations may become more prevalent if rules
are adopted allowing distributed transmission systems (``DTS'').)
112. For new DTV allotments, we propose to continue to use the DTV-
to-DTV geographic separation requirements contained in Section
73.623(d) of the rules. We note that these distances were developed to
be analogous to the long-standing analog TV geographic spacing rules.
We intend that our consideration of petitions for rule making
requesting new DTV allotments will be consistent with the process we
have used for analog TV allotments in that short-spacing waivers will
not be allowed. However, as with analog spacing distances, the DTV
spacing distances allow regular occasions of predicted interference to
occur. After a new DTV allotment has been approved, we propose to
regulate the extent of this interference by requiring applications for
these DTV allotments to comply with the same engineering criteria
standards we are proposing for all other DTV applications. This method
of allowing flexibility for applicants seeking a new DTV allotment
while protecting existing DTV stations' service is consistent with our
analog TV application practice of considering applications that require
a waiver of the geographic spacing requirements. We seek comment on
this proposal, as well as on alternative methods for evaluating
requests for new DTV allotments.
113. Going forward, we propose to protect each station's new DTV
Table Appendix B facilities' coverage only until it has a CP or license
for its post-transition operation, at which time we will limit its
interference protection to its authorized coverage area. We recognize,
however, that we are proposing to require that stations initially apply
for facilities that do not expand their certified coverage and some
stations would need to specify facilities that create a predicted
service contour that is smaller in some directions than their certified
coverage contour in order to comply with that proposal. When the filing
freeze is lifted, we expect many such stations will file maximization
applications. To avoid penalizing stations in such a situation, we
propose to temporarily continue to require that other stations'
maximization applications protect the new DTV Table Appendix B
facilities of stations, even though most stations should have a CP or
license at that time. At an appropriate time, the Media Bureau would
announce the change to limit the required protection to CPs and
licenses for stations that have such authorizations. We seek comment on
this proposal.
2. Pre-Transitional Operations
114. We continue to process applications for analog and DTV new
stations, and changes to existing or authorized stations that comply
with the freeze. With respect to these applications for pre-transition
operation, we intend to continue using the current interference
protection rules. We seek comment on this conclusion. In particular,
the current requirements provide that an application for a new or
modified analog TV station must not cause more than 0.5 percent
interference to any authorized DTV station or allotment. Such an analog
TV application must protect other analog TV stations by meeting the
distance spacing requirements. An application for a new or modified DTV
station must not cause more than 2.0 percent interference to any
authorized analog TV station, DTV station or DTV allotment. Such DTV
applications also must not cause the total cumulative interference
received by any protected station to exceed 10.0 percent. (DTV
applications also must protect Class A TV stations as provided in 47
CFR 73.623(c)(5) and stations in the land mobile radio service pursuant
to 47 CFR 73.623(e).) Calculations of predicted interference
percentages will continue to be based on the standard OET 69
methodology, including use of 1990 Census data. (Although new
population data is available, we believe it is appropriate to continue
to use the 1990 census data for the predicting the populations to be
served by the remaining analog and new digital television stations to
be processed during the transition and the interference those stations
would cause to other stations. The predictions of population served and
interference received used in developing initial DTV transition
assignments in 1998 were based on the 1990 census and that population
base has been relied on subsequently in processing of applications for
analog and DTV modifications and new stations. Our continued use of the
1990 census data for processing the few remaining transition
applications will provide for treatment of these applications on the
same basis as other stations during the transition. We also do not
believe that the differences in population patterns between the 1990
and 2000 census are of sufficient significance for TV service purposes
in the short remaining time of the transition as to warrant
recomputation of the service and interference predictions for all
analog and DTV stations operating during the transition.) The current
database of authorized or applied for stations would also continue to
be used.
G. Other Issues
1. DTV Transmission Standard (ATSC A/53)
115. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the Commission
revised its DTV transmission standard, contained in Section 73.682(d)
of the rules, to specify the use of the August 7, 2001 Advanced
Television Systems Committee (``ATSC'') DTV transmission standard A/53
Revision B with Amendment 1 and Amendment 2 (``A/53-B''). The
Commission also stated that it would continue to encourage further
improvements to the DTV standards and conduct additional rulemakings as
appropriate to incorporate future updates of the ATSC DTV transmission
standard into the Commission's rules. We propose to update Section
73.682(d) to reflect revisions to the ATSC DTV transmission standard A/
53-B since the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order. We seek comment on
this proposal.
116. Since Section 73.682(d) was revised in the Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order, ATSC has continued to update the ATSC DTV
transmission standard; the current version is A/53 Revision E, with
Amendments No. 1 and 2 (``A/53-E''). A/53-E differs from A/53-B in
several respects. First, A/53-E offers several improvements over A/53-
B, including the specifications for Enhanced 8-VSB (``E8-VSB'') for
terrestrial broadcast. E8-VSB enables Enhanced Services, which allow
broadcasters to allocate the base 19.39 Mbps data rate between Main
Service data and Enhanced Services data. Enhanced Services data is
designed to have higher immunity to certain channel impairments than
Main Service data, but Enhanced Services data is delivered at a reduced
information rate selected by the broadcaster from the specified
options. A/53-E further describes the coding constraints that apply to
the use of the MPEG-2 systems specification in the DTV system,
including mandatory main and optional enhanced services. It also
improves the Active Format Description (``AFD'') specifications by
revising and clarifying the relevant standards. In light of these
advantages, we believe that updating the Commission's rules to specify
A/53-E will benefit both broadcasters and
[[Page 37335]]
consumers by allowing broadcasters the flexibility to offer new
technological services. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.
117. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the Commission
declined to mandate that broadcasters use the AFD when the active video
portion picture does not completely fill the coded picture. The
Commission stated that the revisions in the new standard were developed
through careful consideration and deliberation within the technical
committees of ATSC and thus reflected a consensus agreement based on
the input of parties from various segments of the industry. As a
result, broadcasters were given the option to use AFD, but if a station
included AFD data it had to follow the ATSC standard. The Commission
noted, however, that as more consumers acquired widescreen aspect ratio
sets, the problem of ``postage stamp video'' would become more
prevalent if not addressed by broadcasters. At the time, the Commission
believed that broadcasters would want to make their programming
attractive to viewers as they begin to adopt DTV. A coordinated effort
on clarifying AFD and bar data standards between ATSC, CEA and the
Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (``SMPTE'') resulted
in a CEA recommended practice (CEA-CEB16) titled ``Active Format
Description (AFD) & Bar Data Recommended Practice,'' and a proposed
SMPTE 2016-1 standard for television--Format for Active Format
Description and Bar Data. These efforts were designed to encourage the
use of AFD by broadcasters. We thus seek comment on whether these
voluntary, industry driven efforts are sufficient, or if, instead, we
should require broadcasters to provide AFD and bar data. If we do
impose such a requirement, should broadcasters be required to provide
AFD data for all programming broadcast, regardless of its source?
Should such a requirement extend to live programming (e.g., sports and
other events where a combination of SD and HD equipment may be used)?
Assuming that we did require the inclusion of AFD, what effect would
the imposition of such a requirement have on small broadcasters? We
seek comment on these issues.
2. Program System and Information Protocol (``PSIP'') Standard
118. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, the Commission
revised Section 73.682(d) to require the use of the ATSC Program System
and Information Protocol (``PSIP'') standard A/65-B. PSIP data is
transmitted along with a station's DTV signal and provides DTV
receivers with information about the station and what is being
broadcast. PSIP data provides a method for DTV receivers to identify a
DTV station and to determine how a receiver can tune to it. For any
given station, the PSIP data transmitted along with the digital signal
identifies both its DTV channel number and its analog channel number
(referred to as the ``major'' channel number), thereby making it easy
for viewers to tune to the station's DTV channel even if they only know
the station's major channel number. In addition, PSIP data tells the
receiver whether multiple program streams are being broadcast and, if
so, how to find them. It also identifies whether the programs are
closed captioned, conveys available V-chip information, and provides
program information, among other things. The Commission has recognized
the utility that the ATSC PSIP standard offers for both broadcasters
and consumers.
119. Since Section 73.682(d) was revised in the Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order, ATSC has updated the ATSC PSIP standard; the current
version is A/65-C. This new revision further enhances the PSIP standard
and support for delivery of data. The updated ATSC PSIP standard now
requires broadcasters to populate the Event Information Tables
(``EITs'') with accurate information about each event and to update the
EIT if more accurate information becomes available. Currently, under
version A/65-B, many broadcasters provide only general information in
the EIT tables. For example, a network affiliate may provide ``network
programming'' as the descriptor for the majority of its program
offerings. We propose to update Section 73.682(d) to reflect these
revisions to the ATSC PSIP standard since the Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order. We seek comment on this proposal. In particular, we
request input regarding the burden that compliance with A/65-C would
place on broadcasters--especially small broadcasters.
120. We also seek comment from broadcasters and others as to the
need to include more accurate, detailed, and up-to-date information
about each event under this new PSIP standard. We also seek comment
about whether PSIP information is being passed through to cable and
satellite subscribers. If satellite carriers are not passing through
PSIP information, is the information otherwise being reflected
adequately in the electronic program guide and signal they provide to
subscribers?
3. Fees for Ancillary and Supplementary Services
121. In this section, we seek comment on Section 73.624(g) of the
Commission's rules, which requires DTV licensees to report whether they
have provided ancillary and supplementary services and to pay a fee of
five percent of gross revenues derived from certain of those services.
As currently written, this rule refers to the payment of such fees by
``DTV licensees.'' We seek comment on whether the Commission can and
should revise its rules to require that all DTV broadcasters, including
permittees operating pursuant to an STA or any other FCC instrument
authorizing DTV transmissions, that earn revenue from feeable ancillary
and supplementary services, are subject to the provisions of Section
73.624(g).
4. Station Identification
122. In 2004, the Commission established rules generally requiring
DTV stations to follow the same rules for station identification as
analog stations. Specifically, digital stations are required to make
station identification announcements, either visually or aurally, at
the beginning and end of each time of operation as well as hourly. The
identification must consist of the station's call letters followed by
the community or communities specified in the station's license as the
station's location. Stations may insert between the call letters and
the station's community of license the station's frequency, channel
number, name of the licensee, and/or the name of the network, at their
discretion.
123. A station choosing to include its channel number in its
station identification must use the major (analog) channel number.
(Thus, a broadcaster who operates an NTSC service on channel ``26'' and
a DTV service on channel ``27'' would use the major channel ``26'' in
station identification announcements.) The Commission adopted the ATSC
A/65B standard and noted that PSIP, which is part of that standard,
allows viewers to see a broadcaster's major channel number regardless
of the broadcaster's allocated digital broadcast channel. (This allows
broadcasters to keep their existing channel number in the digital
world, thereby assisting viewers who have come to identify these
numbers with particular broadcasters and preserving the investment
broadcasters have made in marketing these numbers.) The Commission
permitted stations choosing to multicast to include additional
information in their station
[[Page 37336]]
announcements identifying each program stream. (Thus, a station with
major channel number 26 might have channel 26.0 (NTSC program stream),
channel 26.1 (HDTV), and 26.2 (SDTV). Stations may provide information
in the station announcement identifying the network affiliation of the
program service (e.g., ``WXXX-DT, channel 26.1, YYY (community of
license), your CW network channel''). Stations simulcasting their
analog programming on their digital channel are permitted to make
station identification announcements simultaneously for both stations
as long as the identification includes both call signs (e.g., ``WXXX-TV
and WXXX-DT'') if it is intended to serve as the identification for
both program streams. Stations simulcasting the analog stream on the
digital channel may also do a shortened identification for both streams
(e.g., ``WXXX-TV/DT''). The Commission's rules require that the station
that is transmitting the multicast stream is the station whose
identification must appear on the program stream. (Thus, if station
WXXX-DT is transmitting programming provided by WYYY-TV or WYYY-LP on
one of WXXX-DT's multicast streams, the identification on that stream
must be the frequency and location of WXXX-DT.)
124. Now that stations have some experience in applying these
station identification rules to digital stations, we invite comment on
whether these rules provide sufficient clarity to broadcasters and
viewers. We specifically invite comment on whether the current rules
provide for appropriate identification of multicast channels,
particularly in circumstances in which one of a station's multicast
streams is being used to air programming provided by another broadcast
station, such as a low power station. As the Commission has previously
noted, as stations transition to digital format and provide multicast
programming, thereby increasing the number of program streams
potentially available to the public, clear identification of the
station providing the programming viewers are watching becomes
increasingly important, both for the viewers and for stations
themselves. We invite comment on any and all aspects of the
Commission's station identification rules, whether any changes to or
clarifications of the rules are appropriate, and, if particular
problems implementing the rules have arisen, specific proposals for how
the rules should be changed.
5. Coordination With Cable Operators, Satellite Systems and Other MVPD
Providers
125. We recognize that the transition to digital television
necessarily involves coordination with Multichannel Video Programming
Distributors (``MVPDs''). (MVPDs include cable operators and Direct
Broadcast Satellite carriers. As of June 2005, approximately 94.2
million TV households, or almost 86 percent of TV households, subscribe
to an MVPD service.) Because a majority of television viewers receive
their broadcast signals via an MVPD, if these providers have problems
receiving and retransmitting digital signals when analog signals are
turned off, that could have a significant adverse impact on the digital
transition. We seek comment here on the issues specifically related to
MVPD readiness to receive and retransmit digital signals to their
subscribers when analog service ends on February 17, 2009. (General
issues regarding mandatory carriage of digital broadcast signals are
being addressed in other dockets.) We also invite comment on what
steps, if any, are necessary to allow consumers to continue to receive
over-the-air television signals in a variety of settings outside their
homes, such as hotels, restaurants, universities and offices.
126. In this regard, we solicit comment from cable operators,
satellite carriers, and private cable operators (also known as
Satellite Master Antenna Television or ``SMATV'' providers) regarding
steps they are taking to ensure that their subscribers will continue to
receive local broadcast stations after the termination of over-the-air
analog broadcast signals from full power stations. Moreover, we request
comment on whether and what type of coordination is needed between
broadcast television stations and MVPDs to facilitate a timely and
smooth transition, whether this coordination is underway, and what
actions the Commission could take to facilitate that coordination. For
example, will cable and satellite operators have technical difficulties
receiving digital signals from local television stations on new
channels (and in some cases from different transmission facilities)?
Are changes needed at cable and SMATV headends and satellite local
receive facilities to receive these signals? Have MVPDs experienced
difficulties receiving and retransmitting local digital broadcast
signals thus far? Will MVPDs be able to handle all the various channel
changes and other modifications that will be necessary, many of which
will occur at midnight on February 17, 2009? Do MVPDs need to test
reception and retransmission capabilities in advance of the transition,
and, if so, when, and how, in light of construction deadlines?
VI. Procedural Matters
A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
127. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (``RFA'') the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') concerning the possible
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules
proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM''). Written
public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified
as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for
comments indicated on the first page of the NPRM. The Commission will
send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the
NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal
Register.
A. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rules
128. This NPRM begins the Commission's third periodic review of the
transition of the nation's broadcast television system from analog to
digital television (``DTV''). The Commission conducts these periodic
reviews in order to assess the progress of the transition and make any
necessary adjustments to the Commission's rules and policies to
facilitate the introduction of DTV service and the recovery of spectrum
at the end of the transition. In 2005, Congress mandated that after
February 17, 2009, full-power television broadcast stations must
transmit only in digital signals, and may no longer transmit analog
signals.
129. The purpose of this NPRM, generally, is to (1) provide a
progress report on the DTV transition; (2) describe the status and
readiness of existing stations to complete the transition; (3) consider
and propose the procedures and rule changes necessary to complete the
transition; and (4) address other issues related to the transition. In
particular, the NPRM proposes (1) rules for applying to construct
final, DTV facilities and (2) construction deadlines for the completion
of final, DTV facilities.
130. The primary objectives of this NPRM is to ensure that, by the
February 17, 2009 transition date, all full-power television broadcast
stations (1) cease analog broadcasting and (2) have
[[Page 37337]]
completed construction and begun operating their final, DTV facilities.
In addition, the NPRM considers proposals to provide broadcasters with
the regulatory flexibility necessary to meet these goals.
B. Legal Basis
131. The authority for the action proposed in this rulemaking is
contained in Sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 7, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309,
312, 316, 318, 319, 324, 325, 336, and 337 of the Communications Act of
1934, 47 U.S.C 151, 154(i) and (j), 157, 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309,
312, 316, 318, 319, 324, 325, 336, and 337.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
132. The RFA directs the Commission to provide a description of
and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that
will be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally
defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the
terms ``small business,'' small organization,'' and ``small government
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
133. We believe that full-power television broadcast stations will
be directly and primarily affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.
Although the proposed rules will not apply to Class A TV stations, low
power television (LPTV) stations, and TV translator stations, it is
still possible that these entities may be affected by the proposed
rules. For example, the proposed rules, if adopted, would permit
applications for analog translators to be filed under specific
circumstances and in that way may affect TV translator stations.
Otherwise, we do not believe any other types of entities will be
directly affected by the proposed rules; however, request comment on
this tentative conclusion. A description of the small entities that may
be directly affected, as well as an estimate of the number of such
small entities, is provided below.
Entities Directly Affected by Proposed Rules
134. Television Broadcasting. The proposed rules and policies apply
to television broadcast licensees and potential licensees of television
service. The SBA defines a television broadcast station as a small
business if such station has no more than $13.5 million in annual
receipts. Business concerns included in this industry are those
``primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with sound.'' The
Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial television
stations to be 1,376. According to Commission staff review of the BIA
Financial Network, MAPro Television Database (``BIA'') on March 30,
2007, about 986 of an estimated 1,374 commercial television stations
(or about 72 percent) have revenues of $13.5 million or less and thus
qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. The Commission has
estimated the number of licensed NCE television stations to be 380. We
note, however, that, in assessing whether a business concern qualifies
as small under the above definition, business (control) affiliations
must be included. Our estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number
of small entities that might be affected by our action, because the
revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate
revenues from affiliated companies. The Commission does not compile and
otherwise does not have access to information on the revenue of NCE
stations that would permit it to determine how many such stations would
qualify as small entities.
135. In addition, an element of the definition of ``small
business'' is that the entity not be dominant in its field of
operation. We are unable at this time to define or quantify the
criteria that would establish whether a specific television station is
dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small
businesses to which rules may apply do not exclude any television
station from the definition of a small business on this basis and are
therefore over-inclusive to that extent. Also as noted, an additional
element of the definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must
be independently owned and operated. We note that it is difficult at
times to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and our
estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive
to this extent.
136. Class A TV, LPTV, and TV translator stations. The proposed
rules and policies may also apply to licensees of Class A TV stations,
low power television (LPTV) stations, and TV translator stations, as
well as to potential licensees in these television services. The same
SBA definition that applies to television broadcast licensees would
apply to these stations. The SBA defines a television broadcast station
as a small business if such station has no more than $13.5 million in
annual receipts. Currently, there are approximately 567 licensed Class
A stations, 2,227 licensed LPTV stations, and 4,518 licensed TV
translators. Given the nature of these services, we will presume that
all of these licensees qualify as small entities under the SBA
definition. We note, however, that under the SBA's definition, revenue
of affiliates that are not LPTV stations should be aggregated with the
LPTV station revenues in determining whether a concern is small. Our
estimate may thus overstate the number of small entities since the
revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate
revenues from non-LPTV affiliated companies. We do not have data on
revenues of TV translator or TV booster stations, but virtually all of
these entities are also likely to have revenues of less than $13.5
million and thus may be categorized as small, except to the extent that
revenues of affiliated non-translator or booster entities should be
considered.
Entities That May Be Indirectly Affected by Proposed Rules
137. Because the rules proposed in this NPRM pertain to the
transition from analog to digital broadcasting of full-power television
broadcast stations, we do not believe the rules proposed will directly
affect any other entities. We seek comment on this tentative
conclusion. Certain entities may believe they would be affected by the
proposed rules. For example, the proposed rules may, in the opinion of
cable operators, satellite carriers other multichannel video
programming distributors (``MVPDs''), indirectly affect these entities.
In addition, the proposed rules may indirectly affect electronics
equipment manufacturers. Although such comment is not required by the
RFA, we invite comment from any small cable operators, small satellite
carriers or other small MVPDs, as well as from small equipment
manufacturers, who believe they might be directly affected by our
proposed rules contained in the NPRM.
138. Cable and Other Program Distribution. Cable system operators
fall within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and Other Program
Distribution, which includes all such companies generating $13.5
million or less in revenue annually. According to the Census Bureau
data for 1997, there were a total of 1,311 firms that operated for the
entire year in the category of Cable and Other Program Distribution. Of
this total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million and an
additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million or
[[Page 37338]]
more, but less than $25 million. In addition, limited preliminary
census data for 2002 indicates that the total number of Cable and Other
Program Distribution entities increased approximately 46 percent
between 1997 and 2002. The Commission estimates that the majority of
providers in this category of Cable and Other Program Distribution are
small businesses.
139. Cable System Operators (Rate Regulation Standard). The
Commission has developed, with SBA's approval, its own definition of a
small cable system operator for the purposes of rate regulation. Under
the Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is one serving
400,000 or fewer subscribers nationwide. We last estimated that there
were 1,439 cable operators that qualified as small cable companies at
the end of 1995. Since then, some of those companies may have grown to
serve more than 400,000 subscribers, and others may have been involved
in transactions that caused them to be combined with other cable
operators. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 1,439
small entity cable system operators.
140. Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard). The
Communications Act also contains a size standard for a ``small cable
operator,'' which is ``a cable operator that, directly or through an
affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than one percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed
$250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that there are 67.7
million subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an operator
serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small
operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual
revenues of all of its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the
aggregate. Based on available data, we estimate that the number of
cable operators serving 677,000 subscribers or less totals
approximately 1,450. The Commission neither requests nor collects
information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with
entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore
is unable at this time to estimate more accurately the number of cable
system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the
size standard contained in the Communications Act.
141. Direct Broadcast Satellite (``DBS'') Service. DBS service is a
nationally distributed subscription service that delivers video and
audio programming via satellite to a small parabolic ``dish'' antenna
at the subscriber's location. Because DBS provides subscription
services, DBS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and
Other Program Distribution. This definition provides that a small
entity is one with $13.5 million or less in annual receipts. Currently,
only three operators hold licenses to provide DBS service, which
requires a great investment of capital for operation. All three
currently offer subscription services. Two of these three DBS
operators, DirecTV and EchoStar Communications Corporation
(``EchoStar''), report annual revenues that are in excess of the
threshold for a small business. The third DBS operator, Dominion Video
Satellite, Inc. (``Dominion''), offers religious (Christian)
programming and does not report its annual receipts. The Commission
does not know of any source which provides this information and, thus,
we have no way of confirming whether Dominion qualifies as a small
business. Because DBS service requires significant capital, we believe
it is unlikely that a small entity as defined by the SBA would have the
financial wherewithal to become a DBS licensee. Nevertheless, given the
absence of specific data on this point, we acknowledge the possibility
that there are entrants in this field that may not yet have generated
$13.5 million in annual receipts, and therefore may be categorized as a
small business, if independently owned and operated.
142. Private Cable Operators (``PCOs''), also known as, Satellite
Master Antenna Television (``SMATV'') Systems. PCOs, also known as
SMATV systems or private communication operators, are video
distribution facilities that use closed transmission paths without
using any public right-of-way. PCOs acquire video programming and
distribute it via terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban multiple
dwelling units such as apartments and condominiums, and commercial
multiple tenant units such as hotels and office buildings. The SBA
definition of small entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution
Services includes PCOs and, thus, small entities are defined as all
such companies generating $13.5 million or less in annual receipts.
Currently, there are more than 150 members in the Independent Multi-
Family Communications Council (IMCC), the trade association that
represents PCOs. Individual PCOs often serve approximately 3,000-4,000
subscribers, but the larger operations serve as many as 15,000-55,000
subscribers. In total, PCOs currently serve approximately one million
subscribers. Because these operators are not rate regulated, they are
not required to file financial data with the Commission. Furthermore,
we are not aware of any privately published financial information
regarding these operators. Based on the estimated number of operators
and the estimated number of units served by the largest ten PCOs, we
believe that a substantial number of PCO qualify as small entities.
143. Home Satellite Dish (``HSD'') Service. Because HSD provides
subscription services, HSD falls within the SBA-recognized definition
of Cable and Other Program Distribution, which includes all such
companies generating $13.5 million or less in revenue annually. HSD or
the large dish segment of the satellite industry is the original
satellite-to-home service offered to consumers, and involves the home
reception of signals transmitted by satellites operating generally in
the C-band frequency. Unlike DBS, which uses small dishes, HSD antennas
are between four and eight feet in diameter and can receive a wide
range of unscrambled (free) programming and scrambled programming
purchased from program packagers that are licensed to facilitate
subscribers' receipt of video programming. There are approximately 30
satellites operating in the C-band, which carry over 500 channels of
programming combined; approximately 350 channels are available free of
charge and 150 are scrambled and require a subscription. HSD is
difficult to quantify in terms of annual revenue. HSD owners have
access to program channels placed on C-band satellites by programmers
for receipt and distribution by MVPDs. Commission data shows that, as
of June 2005, there were 206,358 households authorized to receive HSD
service. The Commission has no information regarding the annual revenue
of the four C-Band distributors.
144. Wireless Cable Systems. Wireless cable systems use the
Broadband Radio Service (``BRS''), formerly Multipoint Distribution
Service (``MDS''), and Educational Broadband Service (``EBS''),
formerly Instructional Television Fixed Service (``ITFS''), frequencies
in the 2 GHz band to transmit video programming and provide broadband
services to residential subscribers. These services were originally
designed for the delivery of multichannel video programming, similar to
that of traditional cable systems, but over the past several years
licensees have focused their operations instead on providing two-way
high-speed Internet access services.
[[Page 37339]]
We estimate that the number of wireless cable subscribers is
approximately 100,000, as of March 2005. Id. Local Multipoint
Distribution Service (``LMDS'') is a fixed broadband point-to-
multipoint microwave service that provides for two-way video
telecommunications. As previously noted, the SBA definition of small
entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution, which includes such
companies generating $13.5 million in annual receipts, appears
applicable to MDS, ITFS and LMDS.
145. Wireless Cable Systems (Commission Auction Standard). The
Commission has defined small MDS (now BRS) and LMDS entities in the
context of Commission license auctions. In the 1996 MDS auction, the
Commission defined a small business as an entity that had annual
average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the previous three
calendar years. This definition of a small entity in the context of MDS
auctions has been approved by the SBA. In the MDS auction, 67 bidders
won 493 licenses. Of the 67 auction winners, 61 claimed status as a
small business. At this time, the Commission estimates that of the 61
small business MDS auction winners, 48 remain small business licensees.
In addition to the 48 small businesses that hold BTA authorizations,
there are approximately 392 incumbent MDS licensees that have gross
revenues that are not more than $40 million and are thus considered
small entities. MDS licensees and wireless cable operators that did not
participate in the MDS auction must rely on the SBA definition of small
entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution. Information
available to us indicates that there are approximately 850 of these
licensees and operators that do not generate revenue in excess of $13.5
million annually. Therefore, we estimate that there are approximately
850 small MDS (or BRS) providers as defined by the SBA and the
Commission's auction rules.
146. Educational institutions are included in this analysis as
small entities; however, the Commission has not defined a small
business size standard for ITFS (now EBS). We estimate that there are
currently 2,032 ITFS (or EBS) licensees, and all but 100 of these
licenses are held by educational institutions. Thus, the Commission
estimates that at least 1,932 ITFS licensees are small businesses.
147. In the 1998 and 1999 LMDS auctions, the Commission defined a
small business as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of
less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. Moreover,
the Commission added an additional classification for a ``very small
business,'' which was defined as an entity that had annual average
gross revenues of less than $15 million in the previous three calendar
years. These definitions of ``small business'' and ``very small
business'' in the context of the LMDS auctions have been approved by
the SBA. In the first LMDS auction, 104 bidders won 864 licenses. Of
the 104 auction winners, 93 claimed status as small or very small
businesses. In the LMDS re-auction, 40 bidders won 161 licenses. Based
on this information, we believe that the number of small LMDS licenses
will include the 93 winning bidders in the first auction and the 40
winning bidders in the re-auction, for a total of 133 small entity LMDS
providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
148. Open Video Systems (``OVS''). In 1996, Congress established
the open video system (``OVS'') framework, one of four statutorily
recognized options for the provision of video programming services by
local exchange carriers (``LECs''). The OVS framework provides
opportunities for the distribution of video programming other than
through cable systems. Because OVS operators provide subscription
services, OVS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and
Other Program Distribution Services, which provides that a small entity
is one with $13.5 million or less in annual receipts. The Commission
has certified 25 OVS operators with some now providing service.
Broadband service providers (``BSPs'') are currently the only
significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises. As
of June 2005, BSPs served approximately 1.4 million subscribers,
representing 1.5 percent of all MVPD households. Affiliates of
Residential Communications Network, Inc. (``RCN''), which serves about
371,000 subscribers as of June 2005, is currently the largest BSP and
14th largest MVPD. RCN received approval to operate OVS systems in New
York City, Boston, Washington, DC and other areas. The Commission does
not have financial information regarding the entities authorized to
provide OVS, some of which may not yet be operational. We thus believe
that at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as small entities.
149. Electronics Equipment Manufacturers. The rules adopted in this
proceeding may indirectly affect manufacturers of digital receiving
equipment and other types of consumer electronics equipment. The
appropriate small business size standard is that which the SBA has
established for manufacturers of radio and television broadcasting and
wireless communications equipment. This category encompasses entities
that primarily manufacture radio, television, and wireless
communications equipment. Under this standard, firms are considered
small if they have 750 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data for 2002
indicate that, for that year, there were a total of 1,041
establishments in this category. Of those, 1,023 had employment under
1,000. Given the above, the Commission estimates that the great
majority of equipment manufacturers are small businesses.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements
150. The proposals set forth in this NPRM, if adopted, would impose
mandatory compliance and reporting requirements on full-power
television broadcast stations, including requiring that such stations:
(1) Must cease analog broadcasting on or before the February 17, 2009
transition date; (2) if they do not have an existing construction
permit for their final, DTV facility, or if they need to modify their
existing construction permit, must file an application for a new or
modified construction permit for their final, DTV facility; (3) must
construct their DTV facility by the construction deadline proposed for
them; (4) must file a form with the Commission detailing their current
transition status, the additional steps necessary in order to be
prepared for digital-only operation on February 17, 2009, and a
timeline for making those steps; and (5) must populate, and update as
necessary, the Event Information Tables (``EITs'') in PSIP data with
accurate information about each event, in accordance with the current
version of the ATSC PSIP standard, A/65-C.
151. In addition, certain proposals set forth in this NPRM, if
adopted, would provide for voluntary compliance and reporting
requirements. Because these voluntary requirements may afford small
television broadcast stations the opportunity for regulatory
flexibility and reduced burdens, they are discussed in Section E. of
this IRFA.
152. Mandatory Termination of Analog Television Broadcasting. By
statute, after the February 17, 2009 transition date, all full-power
television broadcast stations must transmit only in digital signals,
and may no longer transmit analog signals. This statutory mandate
affords the Commission no discretion to offer any regulatory
[[Page 37340]]
flexibility to small television broadcasters concerning the mandatory
analog turn-off. Rather, to implement this statutory mandate, the
Commission must ensure that all full-power television broadcast
stations cease analog broadcasting as of the February 17, 2009
transition date.
153. Applications for New or Modified Construction Permits. Under
the current rules, stations that need to construct or modify DTV
facilities must file construction permit or modification applications.
Commercial stations must file FCC Form 301 and NCE stations must file
FCC Form 340. Stations may file an application to modify their
authority on their current DTV channel at any time, provided they do
not violate the terms of the Commission's filing freeze.
154. According to the NPRM, 634 stations will not be using their
currently authorized DTV channel for post-transition operations and
will, therefore, need to file an application to construct their final,
DTV facility. In addition, if any of the 1,178 stations that will use
their currently authorized DTV channel for post-transition operations
need to change their DTV facilities, e.g., because if they do not have
an authorization for their intended operations, then such stations will
need to file a modification application. Thus, both these groups of
stations will need to file applications for their final, post-
transition facilities.
155. Given the number of stations that will need to file CP or
modification applications and the fast-approaching transition date, the
NPRM proposes to offer expedited processing to a station applying for a
CP to build or modify its post-transition channel, provided that its
application (i) does not seek to expand the station's noise-limited
service contour in any direction beyond that established by the new DTV
Table; (ii) specifies facilities that match or closely approximate
those new DTV Table facilities (i.e., if the station is unable to build
precisely the facilities specified in the new DTV Table, then it must
apply for facilities that deviate no more than five percent from those
new DTV Table facilities with respect to predicted population); and
(iii) is filed within 45 days of the effective date of Section 73.616
of the rules adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding. The
NPRM tentatively concludes that it will not accept applications to
expand post-transition facilities until it has completed processing the
applications to build authorized facilities. The NPRM also tentatively
concludes to adopt a new 0.5 percent interference standard to apply to
maximization applications and to new channel allotments after the
transition.
156. Construction deadlines for DTV facilities. The NPRM proposes
deadlines for all full-power television broadcast stations to complete
construction of their final, DTV facilities in order to ensure that DTV
stations will be providing service on their final, post-transition
channels by the February 17, 2009 transition date. The NPRM proposes
construction deadlines based on a station's channel assignment for pre-
and post-transition operation, and other circumstances affecting the
station's ability to complete final, post-transition facilities. First,
the NPRM proposes that February 17, 2009 will be the construction
deadline for stations whose DTV channel for pre-transition operation is
not the same as their channel for post-transition use. These are
stations that will be starting over with a new channel for DTV service.
Second, for stations whose post-transition channel is the same as their
pre-transition channel, the NPRM proposes to require completion of
stations' post-transition facilities by the deadlines established for
them in the Construction Deadline Extension Order and Use-or-Lose
Order. Most stations (whose post-transition channel is the same as
their pre-transition channel) that received a grant of their extension
request or use-or-lose waiver request were provided six months from the
release date of the Construction Deadline Extension Order or Use-or-
Lose Order, whichever is applicable, to complete construction of their
final, DTV (post-transition) facilities. The other stations (whose
post-transition channel is the same as their pre-transition channel)
that received a grant of their extension request or use-or-lose waiver
request were provided until February 17, 2009 to complete construction
of their final, DTV (post-transition) facilities, because they faced
unique technical challenges, such as needing to switch their top-
mounted analog transmitter with their side-mounted digital transmitter.
Unlike the first group, stations whose post-transition channel is the
same as their pre-transition channel have long been assigned the
channel that they will use for post-transition operations. Third,
notwithstanding the first two groups, the NPRM proposes that February
17, 2009 will be the construction deadline for stations with side-
mounted digital antennas or similar situations in which the operation
of their analog service prevents the completion of their full,
authorized digital facilities.
157. The NPRM also proposes to limit the situations in which
stations may obtain more time to satisfy the proposed new construction
deadlines for completion of final, DTV facilities. For requests for
additional time to construct DTV facilities filed before February 17,
2009 (but after the effective date of the proposed new rule), the NPRM
proposes to revise and apply Section 73.624(d) of the rules.
Specifically, the proposed Section 73.624(d), if adopted, would no
longer grant stations additional time to construct because of equipment
delays, absent extraordinary circumstances. The proposed rule would
also require a stronger demonstration of financial hardship than is now
required. The proposed financial hardship standard would require the
licensee or permittee of a station to show that it is (1) the subject
of a bankruptcy or receivership proceeding, or (2) experiencing severe
financial hardship, as defined by negative cash flow for the past three
years. Stations seeking an extension based upon financial
considerations under this new test would either (1) submit proof that
they have filed for bankruptcy or that a receiver has been appointed,
or (2) submit an audited financial statement for the previous three
years. All such stations also would be required to submit a schedule of
when they expect to complete construction. As is currently required by
the rule, stations making such requests must electronically file FCC
Form 337. With respect to a deadline of February 17, 2009 or later, the
NPRM proposes to apply Section 73.3598 of the rules, which now applies
to DTV singletons, analog TV, and other broadcast services. Stations
must file a notification to inform the Commission of the circumstances
that it believes should toll its construction period.
158. Transition Status Form. The NPRM proposes that every full-
power television broadcast station must file a form with the Commission
that details (1) the current status of the station's digital
transition; (2) the additional steps, if any, the station needs to take
to be prepared for the switch-over deadline; and (3) a plan for how it
intends to meet that deadline. These filings will be posted on the
Commission's website. These forms will assist the Commission, industry,
and the public in assessing progress and making plans for the digital
switchover date. The form will provide information on the status of
each station's construction of final, DTV facilities, allowing the
Commission, industry, and the public to track the progress of the DTV
transition.
159. Program System and Information Protocol (``PSIP'') standard.
The NPRM proposes to update Section 73.682(d) to reflect the revisions
to the ATSC
[[Page 37341]]
Program System and Information Protocol (``PSIP'') standard since the
Second DTV Periodic Report and Order. The current version of the ATSC
PSIP standard is A/65-C. PSIP data is transmitted along with a
station's DTV signal and provides DTV receivers with information about
the station and what is being broadcast. PSIP data provides a method
for DTV receivers to identify a DTV station and to determine how a
receiver can tune to it. For any given station, the PSIP data
transmitted along with the digital signal identifies both its DTV
channel number and its analog channel number (referred to as the
``major'' channel number), thereby making it easy for viewers to tune
to the station's DTV channel even if they only know the station's major
channel number. In addition, PSIP data tells the receiver whether
multiple program streams are being broadcast and, if so, how to find
them. It also identifies whether the programs are closed captioned,
conveys available V-chip information, and provides program information,
among other things. The Commission has recognized the utility that the
ATSC PSIP standard offers for both broadcasters and consumers.
160. This new revision to the ATSC standard further enhances the
PSIP standard and support for delivery of data. The updated ATSC PSIP
standard now requires broadcasters to populate the EITs with accurate
information about each event and to update the EIT if more accurate
information becomes available. Currently, many broadcasters provide
only general information in the EIT tables. For example, a network
affiliate may provide ``network programming'' as the descriptor for the
majority of its program offerings.
E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
161. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.
162. As previously noted, the Commission has no discretion to offer
any regulatory flexibility to small television broadcasters concerning
the mandatory analog turn-off on the February 17, 2009 transition date.
Rather, to implement this statutory mandate, the Commission must ensure
that all full-power television broadcast stations, including small
stations, cease analog broadcasting as of the February 17, 2009
transition date.
163. The NPRM, however, does propose opportunities for regulatory
flexibility with respect to the other mandatory compliance
requirements.
164. With respect to applications for post-transition facilities,
the NPRM proposes to offer expedited processing (as discussed above).
It is each station's responsibility to ensure that it can begin
operations on its post-transition channel no later than the deadline
for the transition on February 17, 2009. Stations also have the
responsibility to file their applications in sufficient time before the
deadline so that they may be granted by the Commission. This option may
well benefit smaller entities.
165. With respect to the proposed construction deadlines to build
final, post-transition facilities, the NPRM proposes to offer a variety
of opportunities for regulatory flexibility if it would facilitate the
transition and ensure that all full-power stations meet the February
17, 2009 transition date.
166. While proposing to establish a stricter standard for requests
for extension of time to construct DTV facilities, the NPRM also
proposes to eliminate the requirement for some stations that they build
pre-transition DTV facilities on channels that are not their post-
transition channel. This will help many small stations facing financial
challenges to complete construction of DTV facilities while also
ensuring that broadcasters continue to focus on the timely construction
of the facilities necessary to transition away from analog transmission
by the transition date. The NPRM also asks whether it should afford
small television broadcasters additional time to construct DTV
facilities. The NPRM also proposes to allow stations to operate on
newly allotted post-transition facilities before the transition
deadline provided they would not interfere with existing, pre-
transition service.
167. The NPRM also requests comment on whether to permit stations
to build less than their full, authorized post-transition facilities by
the relevant construction deadline, provided these stations at least
serve the same area and population that receive their current analog TV
and DTV service so that over-the-air viewers will not lose TV service.
In particular, if such relief is not afforded to all stations, the NPRM
asks whether to afford such relief to small television broadcasters
because of the unique challenges they may face in completing their
transition.
168. The NPRM requests comment on whether to allow stations to
temporarily remain on their pre-transition DTV channel (even though it
is not their post-transition channel) if: (i) They serve at least the
same area and population that receives their current analog TV service
so that over-the-air viewers will not lose TV service; (ii) they do not
cause impermissible interference to other stations or prevent other
stations from making their transition; and (iii) doing so would
facilitate the transition. Stations making such requests would do so in
accordance with the rules for STA. This opportunity may afford
additional regulatory relief to small television broadcasters.
169. To facilitate the construction of, and commencement of
operations on, post-transition facilities, the NPRM also examines the
circumstances in which a station may reduce or terminate its analog
service to facilitate construction of post-transition facilities. This
opportunity may afford additional regulatory relief to small television
broadcasters. The NPRM also considers whether and, if so, under what
circumstances it should accept new requests by stations to return their
pre-transition-only DTV channel (i.e., a DTV channel that is not their
final, post-transition channel) before the end of the transition and
``flash cut'' from their analog channel to their post-transition
channel. This flash-cut option may provide financial relief to small
stations, such as satellite stations, by freeing stations to focus
their efforts on completion of their final, post-transition facilities.
170. With respect to the proposed updating of Section 73.682(d) to
reflect the new revisions to the ATSC PSIP standard, the NPRM seeks
comment on the burden that compliance with the new standard, A/65-C,
would place on small broadcasters, in particular.
171. Consistent with the statutory mandate for full-power TV
broadcast stations to cease analog broadcasting by February 17, 2009,
as well as with broadcasters' obligation to provide and maintain the
best possible TV service to the public, broadcasters are encouraged to
suggest alternative proposals that would avoid the imposition of
significant and unreasonable burdens on small TV broadcasters.
[[Page 37342]]
F. Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Commission's Proposals
172. None.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
173. This NPRM has been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''), and contains proposed new and modified
information collection requirements, including the following proposals:
(1) Applications detailing stations' plans for completing their
transitions; (2) Applications to construct or modify post-transition
facilities (using FCC Forms 301 and 340); (3) Requests to reduce analog
TV service; (4) Requests to terminate analog TV service; (5) Requests
to flash cut; (6) Requests for STA to use analog translators to offset
loss of analog service; (7) Requests for extension of time to construct
(using FCC Form 337), or to toll the construction deadline for, DTV
facilities; (8) Requests to transition early to their post-transition
channel; (9) Requests for STA to temporarily remain on their in-core
pre-transition DTV channel; (10) Requests for STA to build less than
full, authorized post-transition facilities by the deadline; (11)
Applications for a license to cover post-transition facilities (using
FCC Form 302 DTV); and (12) PSIP requirement to populate the Event
Information Tables (``EITs'') with accurate information about each
event and to update the EIT if more accurate information becomes
available. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') to comment on the proposed information
collection requirements contained in this NPRM, as required by the PRA.
174. Written comments on the PRA proposed information collection
requirements must be submitted by the public, the OMB, and other
interested parties on or before September 7, 2007. Comments should
address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
we seek specific comment on how we might ``further reduce the
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees.''
175. Further Information. For additional information concerning the
PRA proposed information collection requirements contained in this
NPRM, contact Cathy Williams at 202-418-2918, or via the Internet to
Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.
B. Ex Parte Rules
176. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding will be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding subject to the ``permit-but-
disclose'' requirements under section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's
rules. Ex parte presentations are permissible if disclosed in
accordance with Commission rules, except during the Sunshine Agenda
period when presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are generally
prohibited. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded
that a memorandum summarizing a presentation must contain a summary of
the substance of the presentation and not merely a listing of the
subjects discussed. More than a one-or two-sentence description of the
views and arguments presented is generally required. Additional rules
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in section
1.1206(b).
C. Filing Requirements
177. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of
the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this
document. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic
Comment Filing System (``ECFS''), (2) the Federal Government's
eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies.
178. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers should
follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting
comments. For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address,
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions,
filers should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and
directions will be sent in response.
179. Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an
original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery,
by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in
receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission.
The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
180. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex
parte submissions will be available for public inspection during
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington,
DC, 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents
will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe
Acrobat.
181. Accessibility Information. To request information in
accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording,
and Braille), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the FCC's
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice),
(202) 418-0432 (TTY). This document can also be downloaded in Word and
Portable Document Format (PDF) at: http://www.fcc.gov.
[[Page 37343]]
VII. Ordering Clauses
182. Accordingly, It is ordered that pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i)
and (j), 7, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 312, 316, 318, 319, 324, 325,
336, and 337 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C 151, 154(i)
and (j), 157, 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 312, 316, 318, 319, 324,
325, 336, and 337 that notice is hereby given of the proposals and
tentative conclusions described in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including the proposed amendments to Part 73 of the Commission's rules.
183. It is further ordered that the Reference Information Center,
Consumer Information Bureau, shall send a copy of this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Digital television, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rule Changes
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows:
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.
2. Add a new Sec. 73.616 to read as follows:
Sec. 73.616 Post-transition DTV station interference protection.
(a) A petition to add a new channel to the post-transition DTV
Table of Allotments contained in Sec. 73.622(i) of this subpart will
not be accepted unless it meets: the DTV-to-DTV geographic spacing
requirements of Sec. 73.623(d)(2) with respect to all existing DTV
allotments in the post-transition DTV Table; the principle community
coverage requirements of Sec. 73.625(a); the Class A TV and digital
Class A TV protection requirements in paragraph (d) of this section;
the land mobile protection requirements of Sec. 73.623(e); and the FM
radio protection requirement of Sec. 73.623(f). The reference
coordinates of a post-transition DTV allotment shall be the authorized
transmitter site, or, where such a transmitter site is not available
for use as a reference point, the coordinates as designated in the FCC
order creating or modifying the post-transition DTV Table of
Allotments.
(b) An application for a new post-transition DTV broadcast station
or for changes in an authorized post-transition DTV station will not be
accepted for filing unless it protects all land mobile operation on
channels 14-20 in accordance with Sec. 73.623(e) and all other post-
transition DTV stations from interference in excess of the limits
established in this section. An application must not cause interference
to more than: the greater of either 0.5 percent the population served
by the other station or the amount of interference already predicted to
be caused by the applicant's authorized facilities.
(1) The protected facilities of a post-transition DTV allotment
shall be the facilities (effective radiated power, antenna height and
antenna directional radiation pattern, if any) authorized by a
construction permit or license, or, where such an authorization is not
available for establishing reference facilities, the facilities
designated in the FCC order creating or modifying the post-transition
DTV Table of Allotments.
(2) For evaluating compliance with this requirement, interference
to populations served is to be predicted based on the 2000 census
population data and otherwise according to the procedure set forth in
OET Bulletin No. 69, including population served within service areas
determined in accordance with Sec. 73.622(e), consideration of whether
F(50,10) undesired signals will exceed the following desired-to-
undesired (D/U) signal ratios, assumed use of a directional receiving
antenna, and use of the terrain dependent Longley-Rice point-to-point
propagation model. Copies of OET Bulletin No. 69 may be inspected
during normal business hours at the: Federal Communications Commission,
Room CY-C203, 445 12th Street, SW., Reference Information Center,
Washington, DC 20554. These documents are also available through the
Internet on the FCC Home Page at http://www.fcc.gov. The threshold
levels at which interference is considered to occur are:
(i) For co-channel stations, the D/U ratio is +15 dB. This value is
only valid at locations where the signal-to-noise ratio is 28 dB or
greater. At the edge of the noise-limited service area, where the
signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio is 16 dB, this value is +23 dB. At
locations where the S/N ratio is greater than 16 dB but less than 28
dB, D/U values are computed from the following formula:
D/U = 15+10log10[1.0/(1.0-10-x/10)]
Where x = S/N-15.19 (minimum signal to noise ratio)
(ii) For interference from a lower first-adjacent channel, the D/U
ratio is -28 dB.
(iii) For interference from a upper first-adjacent channel, the D/U
ratio is -26 dB.
(c) Due to the frequency spacing that exists between Channels 4 and
5, between Channels 6 and 7, and between Channels 13 and 14, the
minimum adjacent channel technical criteria specified in this section
shall not be applicable to these pairs of channels (see Sec.
73.603(a)).
(d) A petition to add a new channel to the post-transition DTV
Table or a post-transition DTV station application that proposes to
expand its allotted or authorized coverage area in any direction will
not be accepted if it is predicted to cause interference to a Class A
TV station or to a digital Class A TV station authorized pursuant to
subpart J of this part, within the protected contour defined in Sec.
73.6010 of this part.
(1) Interference is predicted to occur if the ratio in dB of the
field strength of a Class A TV station at its protected contour to the
field strength resulting from the facilities proposed in the DTV
application (calculated using the appropriate F(50,10) chart from
Figure 9a, 10a, or 10c of Sec. 73.699 of this part) fails to meet the
D/U signal ratios for ``DTV-into-analog TV'' specified in Sec.
73.623(c)(2).
(2) Interference is predicted to occur if the ratio in dB of the
field strength of a digital Class A TV station at its protected contour
to the field strength resulting from the facilities proposed in the DTV
application (calculated using the appropriate F(50,10) chart from
Figure 9a, 10a, or 10c of Sec. 73.699 of this part) fails to meet the
D/U signal ratios specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(3) In support of a request for waiver of the interference
protection requirements of this section, an applicant for a post-
transition DTV broadcast station may make full use of terrain shielding
and Longley-Rice terrain dependent propagation methods to demonstrate
that the proposed facility would not be likely to cause interference to
Class A TV stations. Guidance on using the Longley-Rice methodology is
provided in OET Bulletin No. 69, which is available through the
Internet at http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/#69.
[[Page 37344]]
Note to Sec. 73.616: When this rule was adopted, the filing
freeze announced in an August 2004 public notice (19 FCC Rcd 14810
(MB 2004)) remained in effect. For a short period of time after the
filing freeze is lifted, until a date to be announced by a Media
Bureau Public Notice, applicants must protect Appendix B facilities
in addition to any authorized facilities required to be protected
pursuant to this rule section.
2. Amend Sec. 73.623 by adding a note to paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.623 DTV applications and changes to DTV allotments.
(a) * * *
* * * * *
Note to paragraph (a): Petitions for rule making and
applications seeking facilities that will operate after the end of
the DTV transition must also comply with Sec. 73.616.
3. Amend Sec. 73.624 by adding paragraph (d)(1)(v) and revising
paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.624 Digital television broadcast stations.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(v) February 17, 2009 is the deadline for the completion of
construction of post-transition (DTV) facilities for all commercial and
noncommercial television stations whose post-transition digital channel
is different from their pre-transition digital channel. For purposes of
this construction deadline, the post-transition facilities to be
constructed are those defined by the new DTV Table of Allotments and
accompanying Appendix B, established by the Seventh Report and Order in
MB Docket No. 87-268 and codified at 47 CFR 73.622(i).
* * * * *
(3) Authority delegated. (i) Authority is delegated to the Chief,
Media Bureau to grant an extension of time of up to six months beyond
the relevant construction deadline specified in paragraph (d)(1) of
this section upon demonstration by the DTV licensee or permittee that
failure to meet that construction deadline is due to circumstances that
are either unforeseeable or beyond the licensee's control where the
licensee has taken all reasonable steps to resolve the problem
expeditiously.
(ii) Such circumstances may include, but shall not be limited to:
(A) Inability to construct and place in operation a facility
necessary for transmitting digital television, such as a tower, because
of delays in obtaining zoning or FAA approvals, or similar constraints;
or
(B) Where the licensee or permittee is currently the subject of a
bankruptcy or receivership proceeding, or is experiencing severe
financial hardship as defined by negative cash flow for the past three
years.
(iii) The Bureau may grant no more than two extension requests upon
delegated authority. Subsequent extension requests shall be referred to
the Commission. The Bureau may deny extension requests upon delegated
authority.
(iv) Applications for extension of time shall be filed no earlier
than 90 and no later than 60 days prior to the relevant construction
deadline, absent a showing of sufficient reasons for filing within less
than 60 days of the relevant construction deadline.
* * * * *
4. Revise Sec. 73.682(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.682 TV transmission standards.
* * * * *
(d) Digital broadcast television transmission standard. Effective
November 6, 2007, transmission of digital broadcast television (DTV)
signals shall comply with the standards for such transmissions set
forth in ATSC A/52: ``ATSC Standard Digital Audio Compression (AC-3)''
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 73.8000), ATSC Doc. A/53,
Revision E with Amendment 1 and Amendment 2: ``ATSC Digital Television
Standard,'' (September 13, 2006) except for Section 5.1.2
(``Compression format constraints'') of Annex A (``Video Systems
Characteristics'') and the phrase ``see Table A3'' in Section 5.1.1.
Table A2 and Section 5.1.3 Table A4 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 73.8000), and ATSC A/65C: ``ATSC Program and System Information
Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable,'' (Revision C with
Amendment 1) May 9, 2006 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
73.8000). Although not incorporated by reference, licensees may also
consult ATSC Doc. A/54, Recommended Practice, Guide to Use of the ATSC
Digital Television Standard, including Corrigendum No. 1 (December 4,
2003, Corrigendum No. 1 December 20, 2006), and ATSC Doc. A/69,
Recommended Practice PSIP Implementation Guidelines for Broadcasters
(June 25, 2002) (Secs. 4, 5, 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1066, 1068,
1082 (47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 303)).
5. Revise Sec. 73.8000(b)(2) and (3) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.8000 Incorporation by reference.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) ATSC A/53: ``ATSC Digital Television Standard,'' dated August
7, 2001, Revision E, with Amendment 1 dated April 18, 2006 and
Amendment 2 dated September 13, 2006, IBR approved for Sec. 73.682,
except for section 5.1.2 of Annex A, and the phrase ``see Table A-3''
in section 5.1.1. Table A2 and section 5.1.3 Table A4.
(3) ATSC A/65C: ``ATSC Program and System Information Protocol for
Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable,'' (Revision C) January 2, 2006, with
Amendment 1 dated May 9, 2006, and IBR approved for Sec. 73.682, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 73.9000-73.9001.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-12905 Filed 7-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P