[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 21, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43209-43214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21261]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 87-268; FCC 96-317]


Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on the Existing 
Television Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission is continuing the process for implementation of 
the next era of broadcast television: digital television (DTV) service. 
In this action, the Commission proposes policies for developing the 
initial DTV Table of Allotments, procedures for assigning DTV 
frequencies, and plans for spectrum recovery. The Commission also 
proposes technical criteria for the allotment of additional DTV 
frequencies and provides a draft DTV Table of Allotments. These 
proposals are intended to provide frequencies on which broadcasters 
will operate digital television service and to plan for recovery of 
spectrum from television service for other uses.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 22, 1996, and 
reply comments on or before December 23, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Franca (202-418-2470), Alan 
Stillwell (202-418-2470) or Robert Eckert (202-428-2470), Office of 
Engineering and Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Sixth 
Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 96-
317, adopted July 25, 1996. The full text of this decision is available 
for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. The 
complete text of this decision also may be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, International Transcription 
Service, 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, (202-857-3800).

Summary of the Sixth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making

    1. In this action, the Commission is continuing the DTV 
implementation process by proposing policies for developing the initial 
DTV allotments and procedures for assigning DTV frequencies to 
broadcasters. The Commission also proposed technical criteria for the 
allotment of additional DTV frequencies and provided a draft DTV Table 
of Allotments. The draft Table, which shows how digital frequencies 
might be allotted in individual markets, is based on the principles of 
accommodating all eligible broadcasters, replicating existing service 
areas, and sound spectrum management. The Commission stated that, while 
it expects the final DTV Table of Allotments to be based on these 
principles, the Table issued in this Further Notice is a draft and 
revisions are anticipated. The Commission's staff will work with 
broadcasters and other parties to revise the Table as appropriate. The 
Commission said that its goals in this phase of the proceeding are to 
ensure that the spectrum is used efficiently and effectively through 
reliance on market forces, and to ensure that the introduction of 
digital television fully serves the public interest.
    2. The Commission is proposing several primary objectives for 
guiding the development of DTV allotments and assignments to ensure 
that broadcasters will be able to transition their transmitting 
facilities to DTV service. The first of these principles is to fully 
accommodate all eligible broadcasters,

[[Page 43210]]

i.e., the Commission will attempt to provide a second channel for DTV 
service for all existing NTSC broadcasters. Eligible broadcasters 
include: (1) all full service television broadcast stations licensees; 
(2) permittees authorized as of October 24, 1994; and (3) all parties 
with applications for a construction permit on file as of October 24, 
1991, who are ultimately awarded full-service broadcast station 
licenses. This approach would ensure that all full service broadcasters 
are able to provide digital TV service.
    3. The second objective is to provide, to the extent possible, all 
existing broadcasters with a DTV service area that is comparable to 
their existing NTSC service area (service replication). Broadcasters 
would thus be assigned channels that replicate the service areas of 
their existing stations.
    4. The third objective is to attempt to minimize all unavoidable 
interference without preference to either NTSC or DTV service. The 
proposed allotment approach would balance unavoidable interference 
among both NTSC and DTV stations equally.
    5. The Commission stated that it intends to consider a spectrum 
plan under which all future digital TV service would eventually be 
located in a core region of the existing VHF and UHF broadcast 
spectrum, namely the spectrum at VHF channels 7-13 and UHF channels 14-
51. This is the area of the TV spectrum that is technically best suited 
for the transmission of DTV. Under this plan, the Commission would 
attempt to provide all broadcasters with access to a 6 MHz channel for 
DTV broadcasting within the core region. Because of the limited 
availability of spectrum and the need to accommodate all existing 
facilities with minimal interference among stations, however, some 
broadcasters would be provided transition DTV channels outside this 
area. These broadcasters would move their DTV operations to a channel 
in the core spectrum when one became available. This plan would permit 
the eventual recovery of 138 MHz of spectrum nationwide. This spectrum 
wold be obtained from the lower VHF channels, i.e., channels 2-6, and 
the upper UHF channels, i.e., channels 52-69. The Commission further 
observed that this plan may facilitate the early recovery of channels 
60-69.
    6. The FNPRM also asks for comment on an option suggested by the 
Association of Maximum Service Television, Inc. This approach would not 
attempt to concentrate DTV allotments in a core area of the spectrum. 
Since all channels would be available, such an approach could 
theoretically provide for some degree of improved service area 
replication and interference performance. Such an approach might also 
have less impact on low power TV and TV translator stations. On the 
other hand, this option would place more DTV stations on channels that 
are less desirable for broadcast operations. Further, early recovery of 
spectrum would be more difficult and therefore less likely.
    7. The Commission also presented a number of proposals for other 
policies, procedures and technical criteria to be used in allotting DTV 
channels. These proposals include: (1) specifying the use of existing 
NTSC transmitter site coordinates as the reference points for the new 
DTV allotments; (2) deleting all existing vacant NTSC allotments to 
provide sufficient spectrum for DTV and, where feasible, replacing 
deleted NTSC vacant noncommercial allotments with new DTV allotments; 
(3) avoiding the use of TV channels 3, 4, and 6 to minimize 
interference to cable terminal devices, VCRs and FM radio service; and, 
(4) protecting land mobile authorizations on channels 14-20. In 
addition, the Commission requested comments and proposals regarding an 
appropriate frequency labeling scheme for DTV service.
    8. The Commission proposed to continue the secondary status of low 
power TV and TV translator stations. However, it requested comment on 
ways in which to minimize the impact on low power operations.
    9. The construction of an actual Table of Allotments is an 
extremely complex and difficult task. To fulfill this task, the 
Commission's our staff has developed sophisticated operations research 
methodology and computer software that provides the capability to 
produce allotment/assignment table based on alternative policy plans 
and to incorporate alternate allotment schemes that may be negotiated 
by broadcasters.
    10. The Commission proposed an initial DTV Table of Allotments that 
is based on the principles, policies and methodologies described above. 
This Table, which provides a DTV allotment for all 1578 eligible 
broadcasters and also allows for an additional 143 DTV allotments to be 
reserved for future noncommercial use, meets all of the Commission's 
proposed policy objectives.
    11. The Commission stated that it intended to provide broadcasters 
an opportunity to negotiate changes to the proposed DTV Table of 
Allotments and would consider such negotiated changes in the 
development of the final DTV Table. Specifically, the Commission 
indicated that it will permit broadcasters within a community to 
exchange among themselves their designated allotments. It also stated 
that it will permit broadcasters to develop alternative allotment/
assignment plans for their local area.
    12. The Commission stated that, consistent with its proposal to 
eliminate all existing vacant allotments, it will not accept additional 
applications for new NTSC stations that are filed after 30 days from 
the publication of this Further Notice in the Federal Register. This 
will provide time for filing of any applications that are currently 
under preparation. The Commission stated that as it processes the 
applications on file now and those that are filed before the end of 
this filing opportunity, it will continue its current policy of 
considering requests for waiver of its 1987 freeze Order (Order, RM-
5811, Mimeo No. 4074, released July 17, 1987), on a case-by-case basis. 
When applications for new stations are accepted for filing, the 
Commission will continue its process of issuing Public Notices that 
``cut-off'' the opportunity for filing competing, mutually-exclusive 
applications. In connection with these cut-off notices, it will allow 
additional competing applications to be filed after the end of this 
filing opportunity. The Commission indicated that while it anticipates 
that these applications for new NTSC TV stations on existing allotments 
will not have a significant negative impact on the development of the 
DTV Table of Allotments, it reserves the right, in specific cases, to 
determine that the public interest is better served if they are not 
granted, granted only if amended to specify reduced facilities, or 
granted only with a condition that limits the interference that the 
station would be allowed to cause.
    13. The Commission stated that it also will not accept petitions 
for rule making proposing to amend the existing TV Table of Allotments 
in Section 73.606(b) of the rules, 47 CFR Section 73.606(b), to add an 
allotment for a new NTSC station. Other petitions to amend the TV Table 
of Allotments (for example, proposing to change a station's community 
of license or altering the channel on which it operates, including 
changes in which channel allotment in a community is reserved for 
noncommercial educational use) can continue to be filed, but any such 
changes to the table that include a modification of a station's 
authorization will be conditioned on the outcome of this DTV rule 
making proceeding. This termination of the opportunity to file 
petitions to add NTSC allotments for new stations is effective as of 
the close

[[Page 43211]]

of business on the date of adoption of this Further Notice. Any 
petitions that are currently on file and any rule making proceedings 
that are currently open will be addressed on a case-by-case basis, 
taking into account the impact on the draft DTV allotment table. For 
those pending cases in which a new NTSC channel is allotted, the 
Commission will make an exception to its decision to cease accepting 
applications for new NTSC stations, and the accompanying allotment 
Report and Order will specify the period of time for filing 
applications.
    14. The Commission stated that its decision to cease accepting 
applications for new NTSC TV stations 30 days after publication of this 
Further Notice in the Federal Register and new petitions for rule 
making to add new NTSC allotments immediately, as indicated above, is 
based on the need to preserve the available spectrum for use by new DTV 
stations during the transition. The draft DTV Table provided herein was 
developed on the assumption that the existing vacant NTSC allotments 
for which no construction permit application is pending will be 
deleted. It is necessary to delete these allotments in order to provide 
a DTV allotment for all eligible broadcast stations. The Commission 
also stated that it is necessary to terminate the licensing of new NTSC 
as quickly as possible in order to begin the process of transitioning 
to DTV service. To continue to accept new applications for NTSC 
stations, now that the actual start of this new service is approaching, 
could potentially prolong the transition process. The Commission 
indicated that the additional 30 day period it has provided for filing 
new applications for NTSC construction permits will accommodate any 
parties who may be in the process of preparing such applications now. 
Accordingly, as allowed under Section 553 (b) and (d) of the 
Administrative Procedures Act, the Commission found that there is good 
cause for implementing these new policies without a notice and comment 
procedure and that such a procedure would be contrary to its efforts to 
implement DTV service.
    15. With regard to modifications of existing stations, the 
Commission stated that it is concerned that the service area 
replications to be provided by the draft Table set forth herein could 
be substantially affected if stations make changes to their technical 
operations, i.e., maximum effective radiated power (ERP), antenna 
height above average terrain (HAAT), and transmitter locations from 
this point on. Furthermore, continuing changes in station operations 
could affect broadcasters ability to comment meaningfully on the 
proposed Table and our ability to finalize the DTV Table of Allotments. 
The Commission indicated, however, that it is also concerned that 
freezing modifications to existing NTSC stations could pose hardships 
for broadcasters. The Commission noted that in many cases it may be 
possible to permit modification of existing stations without affecting 
the DTV Table. It therefore stated that it will continue to permit the 
filing of applications to modify the technical facilities, i.e., ERP, 
HAAT or transmitter location, of existing or authorized NTSC TV 
stations. However, in order to preserve our ability to develop the DTV 
Table, the Commission stated that it will henceforth condition the 
grant of applications for modifications of technical facilities, 
including those for applications on file before the date of the 
adoption of this Further Notice but granted after that date, on the 
outcome of its final decision on the DTV Table of Allotments. To the 
extent that an existing station's service or potential for causing 
interference are extended into new areas by grant of an application, 
the condition may require the station's authorized facilities to be 
reduced or modified. The Commission is seeking comment on whether this 
condition should involve different consequences for applications for 
modifications on file as of the date of adoption of this Further 
Notice, as opposed to such applications filed after that date.

Procedural Matters

    16. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415 
and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR Sections 1.415 and 1.419, 
interested parties may file comments on or before November 22, 1996, 
and reply comments on or before December 23, 1996. To file formally in 
this proceeding, you must file an original and five copies of all 
comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want each 
Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file 
an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply 
comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 
Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available 
for public inspection during regular business hours in the Dockets 
Reference Room of the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. You may also file comments electronically 
via the internet at [email protected].
    17. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 
the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) of the expected significant economic impact on small entities by 
the policies and rules proposed in this Further Notice of Proposed Rule 
Making in MM Docket No. 87-268. Written public comments are requested 
on the IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and 
must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Further Notice 
provided above in Section X.
    Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rule: In this rule making 
action the Commission presents proposals for the policies, procedures 
and technical criteria that it will use in allotting channels for 
broadcast digital television (DTV), plans for the recovery of a portion 
of the spectrum currently allocated to TV broadcasting, and a draft DTV 
Table of Allotments. The objective of this action is to obtain comment 
and information that will assist the Commission in allotting DTV 
channels. The Commission seeks to allot DTV channels in a manner that 
is most efficient for broadcasters and the public and least disruptive 
to broadcast television service during the period of transition from 
NTSC to DTV service and to recover spectrum.
    Legal Basis: The proposed action is authorized under Sections 4(i), 
7, 301, 302, 303 and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 
47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 301, 302, 303 and 307.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which the 
Rules Will Apply

(1) Definition of a ``Small Business''
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, small entities may include 
small organizations, small businesses, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601(6). The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. Sec. 601(3) generally defines the term ``small business'' as 
having the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under 
the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 632. 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 Small Business Administration (``SBA''). According 
to the SBA's regulations, entities engaged in television broadcasting 
may have a maximum of $10.5 million in annual receipts in order to 
qualify as a small business concern. 13 CFR 121.201. This

[[Page 43212]]

standard also applies in determining whether an entity is a small 
business for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601(3), the statutory definition of a 
small business applies ``unless an agency after consultation with the 
Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after 
opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of 
such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and 
publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' While we 
tentatively believe that the foregoing definition of ``small business'' 
greatly overstates the number of television broadcast stations that are 
small businesses and is not suitable for purposes of determining the 
impact of the new rules on small business, we did not propose an 
alternative definition in the IRFA. Accordingly, for purposes of this 
Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, we utilize the SBA's definition 
in determining the number of small businesses to which the rules apply, 
but we reserve the right to adopt a more suitable definition of ``small 
business'' as applied to television broadcast stations and to consider 
further the issue of the number of small entities that are television 
broadcasters in the future. Further, in this IRFA, we will identify the 
different classes of small television stations that may be impacted by 
the rules adopted in this Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making.
(2) Issues in Applying the Definition of a ``Small Business''
    The SBA has defined ``annual receipts'' specifically in 13 CFR part 
104, and its calculations include an averaging process. We do not 
currently require submission of financial data from licensees that we 
could use to apply the SBA's definition of a small business. Thus, for 
purposes of estimating the number of small entities to which the rules 
apply, we are limited to considering the revenue data that are publicly 
available, and the revenue data on which we rely may not correspond 
completely with the SBA definition of annual receipts.
    Under SBA criteria for determining annual receipts, if a concern 
has acquired an affiliate or been acquired as an affiliate during the 
applicable averaging period for determining annual receipts, the annual 
receipts in determining size status include the receipts of both firms. 
13 CFR 121.104(d)(1). The SBA defines affiliation in 13 CFR 121.103. 
While the Commission refers to an affiliate generally as a station 
affiliated with a network, the SBA's definition of affiliate is 
analogous to our attribution rules. Generally, under the SBA's 
definition, concerns are affiliates of each other when one concern 
controls or has the power to control the other, or a third party or 
parties controls or has the power to control both. 13 CFR 
121.103(a)(1). The SBA considers factors such as ownership, management, 
previous relationships with or ties to another concern, and contractual 
relationships, in determining whether affiliation exists. 13 CFR 
121.103(a)(2). Instead of making an independent determination of 
whether television stations were affiliated based on SBA's definitions, 
we relied on the industry data bases available to us to afford us that 
information.
(3) Estimates Based on Census and BIA Data
    According to the Census Bureau, in 1992, there were 1,155 out of 
1,478 operating television stations with revenues of less than ten 
million dollars. This represents 78 percent of all television stations, 
including non-commercial stations. See 1992 Census of Transportation, 
Communications, and Utilities, Establishment and Firm Size, May 1995, 
at 1-25. The Census Bureau does not separate the revenue data by 
commercial and non-commercial stations in this report. Neither does it 
allow us to determine the number of stations with a maximum of 10.5 
million dollars in annual receipts. Census data also indicates that 81 
percent of operating firms (that owned at least one television station) 
had revenues of less than $10 million.
    We have also performed a separate study based on the data contained 
in the BIA Publications, Inc. Master Access Television Analyzer 
Database, which lists a total of 1,141 full-power commercial television 
stations. It should be noted that the percentage figures derived from 
the data base may be underinclusive because the data base does not list 
revenue estimates for noncommercial educational stations, and these are 
therefore excluded from our calculations based on the data base. Non-
commercial stations would be subject to the allotment rules and 
policies proposed herein. The data indicate that, based on 1995 revenue 
estimates, 440 full-power commercial television stations had an 
estimated revenue of 10.5 million dollars or less. That represents 54 
percent of commercial television stations with revenue estimates listed 
in the BIA program. The data base does not list estimated revenues for 
331 stations. Using a worst case scenario, if those 331 stations for 
which no revenue is listed are counted as small stations, there would 
be a total of 771 stations with an estimated revenue of 10.5 million 
dollars or less, representing approximately 68 percent of the 1,141 
commercial television stations listed in the BIA data base.
    Alternatively, if we look at owners of commercial television 
stations as listed in the BIA data base, there are a total of 488 
owners. The data base lists estimated revenues for 60 percent of these 
owners, or 295. Of these 295 owners, 158 or 54 percent had annual 
revenues of $10.5 million or less. Using a worst case scenario, if the 
193 owners for which revenue is not listed are assumed to be small, the 
total of small entities would constitute 72 percent of owners.
    In summary, based on the foregoing worst case analysis using census 
data, we estimate that our rules will apply to as many as 1,155 
commercial and non-commercial television stations (78 percent of all 
stations) that could be classified as small entities. Using a worst 
case analysis based on the data in the BIA data base, we estimate that 
as many as approximately 771 commercial television stations (about 68 
percent of all commercial television stations) could be classified as 
small entities. As we noted above, these estimates are based on a 
definition that we believe greatly overstates the number of television 
broadcasters that are small businesses. Further, it should be noted 
that under the SBA's definitions, revenues of affiliates that are not 
television stations should be aggregated with the television station 
revenues in determining whether a concern is small. The estimates 
overstate the number of small entities since the revenue figures on 
which they are based do not include or aggregate such revenues from 
non-television affiliated companies.
    The proposed DTV Table of Allotments would also affect low power 
television (LPTV) and TV translator stations. The Commission's records 
indicate that currently, there are about 1,750 licensed LPTV stations 
and 5,050 licensed TV translators. The Commission has also issued about 
1,400 construction permits for new LPTV stations. We do not collect 
individual station financial data for low power television (LPTV) 
Stations and TV translator stations. However, based on its experience 
with LPTV and TV translator stations, the Commission believes that all 
such stations have revenues of less than $10.5 million. We also seek 
information on the number of low power stations that operate 
commercially and noncommercially.

[[Page 43213]]

(4) Alternative Classification of Small Stations
    An alternative way to classify small television stations is by the 
number of employees. The Commission currently applies a standard based 
on the number of employees in administering its Equal Employment 
Opportunity Rule (EEO) for broadcasting. Thus, radio or television 
stations with fewer than five full-time employees are exempted from 
certain EEO reporting and recordkeeping requirements. We estimate that 
the total numbers of commercial and noncommercial television stations 
with 4 or fewer employees are 132 and 136, respectively.
    Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements: The proposals set forth in this action would 
involve no changes to reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance 
requirements beyond what is already required under the current 
regulations.
    Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These 
Rules: None.
    Significant Alternatives to Proposed Rules Which Minimize 
Significant Economic Impact of Small Entities and Accomplish Stated 
Objectives: The DTV Table of Allotments proposed in this action will 
affect all of the commercial and noncommercial broadcast television 
stations eligible for a DTV channel in the transition period and a 
significant number of the low power and TV translator stations. It is 
expected that the proposed allotments will constitute the population of 
channels on which broadcasters will operate DTV service in the future. 
Allotment of these channels is therefore expected to be very important 
to the broadcast community. All of the affected stations will have to 
obtain new transmission facilities and, to a varying extent, production 
equipment to operate on the new DTV channels. The cost of equipment to 
operate on these new channels is expected to vary from $750,000 upwards 
to $10 million. The actual cost of equipment is expected to vary in 
accordance with the degree to which the station becomes involved in DTV 
programming and origination.
    The proposed DTV Table of Allotments will also affect low power 
television (LPTV) and TV translator stations. Total investment in the 
LPTV and TV translator facilities is estimated to be about $150-$250 
million. Studies by the FCC staff indicate that there is not sufficient 
spectrum to accommodate both low power stations and DTV stations. These 
studies estimate that up to about one-third of all LPTV stations and 
one-quarter of all TV translators may have to cease operation to make 
way for DTV stations. In general, most LPTV stations within major 
markets will be affected, while rural operations will be affected to 
lesser degrees. In this regard, we note that, at our December 12, 1995, 
en banc meeting on digital television, Mr. Sherwin Grossman of the 
Community Broadcasters Association expressed concern about the impact 
that implementation of DTV service would have on the low power TV 
industry. He argued that to avoid affecting low power TV service we 
should pick a date or range of dates and require all existing stations 
to convert to DTV service, rather than giving them a second channel, 
and that we should not look to recover TV spectrum until everyone who 
needs broadcast service is able to receive it. Similarly, Abacus 
Television (Abacus), in comments submitted in response to our Fourth 
Further Notice and Third Notice of Inquiry in this proceeding, 60 FR 
42130 (August 15, 1995), argued that we should attempt to protect low 
power stations in order to protect the unique and diverse services that 
low power stations provide the public.
    The process of creating DTV channel allotments is an optimization 
task that offers a great number of possible alternative ``mixes'' of 
channel allotments for each community. In evaluating the merits of 
allotment alternatives, the Commission intends to make every effort to 
accommodate the needs and concerns of all affected parties. We also 
intend to consider negotiated allotment/assignment agreements submitted 
by broadcasters. We expect that the final Table that is adopted will 
contain a number of revisions of the allotments proposed herein.
    As indicated above, we also intend to consider policies for 
minimizing the impact of our DTV allotment and spectrum recovery 
proposals on low power stations. In particular, we are proposing to 
permit displaced low power stations to apply for a suitable replacement 
channel in the same area without being subject to competing 
applications. We will also permit low power stations to operate until a 
displacing DTV station or new service provider is operational. Further, 
we are proposing to allow low power stations to file non-window 
displacement relief applications to change their operating parameters 
to cure or prevent interference caused to or received from a DTV 
station or other protected service. Finally, we intend to explore other 
possibilities that would preserve access to LPTV programming. One 
approach would be to require DTV stations to devote a portion of their 
channel capacity to the carriage of local LPTV stations that are 
displaced. Another approach would be to require that all full service 
broadcasters in a market agree on some arrangement for the carriage of 
the programming of displaced LPTV stations during the transition.
    We recognize that in addition to the costs incurred to upgrade 
engineering and technical operations from analog to digital 
transmission, small stations will also incur costs to promote their new 
channel identification. Such costs may include: advertising and 
publicity on-air and additional media; changes to the signage mounted 
in studio and newsroom sets; channel identification on vehicles, 
camera/video equipment and accessories; graphic design, typesetting and 
printing costs for new stationary and paper products; and the 
production of sales marketing and promotional materials. We seek 
comment on the type of modifications, production and costs necessary to 
facilitate a transition to a new channel and the economic impact these 
expenses will have on small commercial and noncommercial television 
stations. We seek comment on whether the Commission should adopt 
measures that will assist small stations (as classified under either 
the SBA definition or their number of employees) in their transition, 
either in their cost to upgrade technical operations or new channel 
identification. If such measures should be taken, please provide 
recommendations and state with particularity what class of small 
stations should be the beneficiaries of such proposals.
    It is possible that there may be some small stations that will be 
required to move a second time, and will incur additional costs, within 
a relatively short period of time, to promote their new DTV channel 
identification. We seek comments on how to minimize or offset these 
additional costs to a small station who is also subjected to a second 
move.

Ordering Clauses

    18. In accordance with the proposals and actions described herein, 
it is ordered, that the Commission will not accept additional 
applications for new NTSC stations that are filed after 30 days from 
the date of publication of this Further Notice in the Federal Register. 
The Commission will continue to process applications for new NTSC 
stations that are currently on file and any new such applications that 
are filed

[[Page 43214]]

on or before 30 days from the date of publication of this Further 
Notice in the Federal Register in accordance with procedures and 
standards indicated herein. In addition, it is ordered that, effective 
immediately as of the close of business on the date of adoption of this 
Further Notice, the Commission will not accept any additional Petitions 
for Rule Making proposing to amend the existing TV Table of Allotments 
in Section 73.606(b) of its rules to add an allotment for a new NTSC 
station. It is further ordered that, effective immediately as of the 
close of business on the date of adoption of this Further Notice, the 
Commission will condition the grant of any modifications of the 
technical parameters of existing full service NTSC stations on the 
outcome of this rule making proceeding.
    19. This action is being taken pursuant to authority contained in 
Sections 4(i), 7, 301, 302, 303 and 307 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 301, 302, 303 and 
307. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rule making 
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the 
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the 
Commission's rules. See generally 47 CFR Sections 1.1202, 1.1203, and 
1.1206(a).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television.

Federal Communications Commission
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-21261 Filed 8-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P