[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 130 (Monday, July 9, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37310-37344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-12905]



[[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

  Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed 
Rules  

[[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: [email protected]. To get filing instructions, filers 
should send an e-mail to [email protected], 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 [email protected] 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, [email protected] of the Media 
Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-2120 or Eloise Gore, 
[email protected], of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-
2120; Gordon Godfrey, [email protected], of the Media Bureau, 
Engineering Division, (202) 418-7000; Nazifa Sawez, 
[email protected], of the Media Bureau, Video Division, (202) 418-
1600; or Alan Stillwell, [email protected], 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 
[email protected] 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 [email protected]; 
and also to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB, Room 10234 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20503, or via Internet to [email protected], 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 [email protected] or [email protected].

    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 
[email protected] 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 
[email protected] 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 
[email protected].

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 [email protected], 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 [email protected] 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