[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 26, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30021-30030]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12806]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 27, and 73
[AU Docket No. 14-252; GN Docket No. 12-268; DA 15-606]
Incentive Auction Task Force Releases Initial Clearing Target
Optimization Simulations
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Incentive Auction Task Force provides the results of
several staff simulations of the initial clearing target optimization
procedure proposed in the Auction 1000 Comment PN and/or Comment PN as
discussed further in this under the Supplementary Information. In this
document, the Federal Communications Commission's (Commission)
Incentive Auction Task Force seeks comment on the data and analyses
released in this document and the attached Appendix.
DATES: Submit comments on or before June 3, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket numbers in
this proceeding, AU Docket No. 14-252 and GN Docket No. 12-268, by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS): http://fcc.gov/ecfs//. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail): Federal Communications Commission,
9300 East Hampton Dr., Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service (First-class, Express, and Priority):
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St. SW., Washington, DC
20554.
Hand-delivered/Courier: Federal Communications Commission,
445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
document. All comments received will be posted without change to ECFS
at http://fcc.gov/ecfs//, including any personal information provided.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public Participation''
heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: This document is in AU Docket No. 14-252 and GN Docket No. 12-
268. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments
received, go to ECFS at http://fcc.gov/ecfs//.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madelaine Maior of the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, Broadband Division, at (202) 418-1466 or
email to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Documents
FCC Information relating to the Incentive Auction will be posted to
and available on the LEARN Web site at: http://www.fcc.gov/learn. This
document was released on May 20, 2015, and is available electronically
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-15-606A1.pdf and
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-15-606A2.pdf. The
complete text of this document as well as any comments and ex parte
submissions will also be available for public inspection during regular
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (CY-A257) at the Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.
These documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft
Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.
Public Participation
Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before
the dates indicated on the first page of this document. Comments may be
filed using the Commission's ECFS. See Electronic Filing of Documents
in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an
original and one copy of each filing. If more than one active 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 commercial overnight courier,
or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings
must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), or 202-
418-0432 (tty).
I. Synopsis
1. The clearing target selection procedure proposed in the Auction
1000 Comment PN \1\ would, inter alia, impose a nationwide cap on
impairments.\2\ To
[[Page 30022]]
conduct the simulations, the staff applied the clearing target
selection procedure proposed in the Auction 1000 Comment PN,\3\ with
the following exceptions reflecting the range of comments in response
to the Comment PN. Instead of accommodating impairments up to 20
percent, the simulations apply a standard of up to (but not equal to)
the equivalent of one license block nationwide, as measured by weighted
population (``weighted-pops'').\4\ The simulations also apply equal
weighting to impairments regardless of whether they are in the uplink
or downlink portion of the band.\5\ The data and information we release
are illustrative only.\6\ The Commission will adopt final decisions
regarding the proposed initial clearing target selection procedure in a
forthcoming Auction 1000 Procedures PN.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Comment Sought on Competitive Bidding Procedures for
Broadcast Incentive Auction 1000, Including Auctions 1001 and 1002,
GN Docket No. 12-268, AU Docket No. 14-252, Public Notice, FCC 14-
191, 29 FCC Rcd 15750 (Dec. 17, 2014) (``Auction 1000 Comment PN''
or ``Comment PN'').
\2\ Impairments are the result of assigning TV stations to
channels in the 600 MHz Band in order to accommodate market
variation. Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of
Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, GN Docket No. 12-268, Report
and Order, 29 FCC Rcd 6567, 6604-6607, paras. 81-87 (2014)
(``Incentive Auction R&O''). See Expanding the Economic and
Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, GN
Docket No. 12-268, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 29 FCC Rcd 13071 (2014) (adopting methodology
for use during the incentive auction to predict inter-service
interference between impairing TV stations and licensed wireless
services in the 600 MHz Band).
\3\ Auction 1000 Comment PN, 29 FCC Rcd at 15762-69, paras. 27-
45.
\4\ ``Weighted-pops'' refers to the proposed approach of
weighting the population in a given PEA based on an index of area-
specific prices from prior auctions and counting population in each
block in the PEA. See id., 29 FCC Rcd at 15766-67, para. 38, 15803,
paras. 162-63. The standard applied in the simulations would allow
impairments at a smaller percentage of impaired weighted-pops at
higher clearing targets and a larger percentage of impaired
weighted-pops at lower clearing targets. We note that ``the
equivalent of one block nationwide'' does not mean that one block
would be impaired in each market, but rather that the total number
of impaired weighted-pops cannot exceed the equivalent weighted-pops
of one block nationwide in the aggregate. For example, under the
clearing targets and associated band plans adopted in the Incentive
Auction R&O, the equivalent of one block under an 84 megahertz
clearing target would be approximately 14 percent of total weighted-
pops nationwide, the equivalent of one block under a 114 megahertz
clearing target would be approximately 11 percent, and the
equivalent of one block under a 126 megahertz clearing target would
be 10 percent.
\5\ This variation from the Comment PN eliminates the proposed
weighting on impairments in the downlink band, under which a
downlink impairment would be counted as impairing the corresponding
uplink band, but an uplink impairment would not be counted as
impairing the corresponding downlink band. Auction 1000 Comment PN,
29 FCC Rcd at 15762, para. 29. We also note that the simulations
apply a 10 percent standard for treating a county's entire
population as impaired for the purposes of applying the primary
objective; the Comment PN proposed a range between 10 and 20
percent. See id.
\6\ See Incentive Auction Task Force Releases Updated Constraint
File Data Using Actual Channels and Staff Analysis Regarding
Pairwise Approach to Preserving Population Served, GN Docket No. 12-
268, ET Docket No. 13-26, Public Notice, 29 FCC Rcd 5687, 5687 (June
2, 2014) (``Aggregate Interference PN'').
\7\ Auction 1000 Comment PN, 29 FCC Rcd at 15753-54, para. 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. In order to conduct the simulations released with this document,
the staff had to make certain assumptions about protection of foreign
TV stations. With respect to Canada, the simulations assume for
illustrative purposes only that the Commission will not need to protect
vacant allotments in Canada's TV bands, an option put forth in Industry
Canada's Consultation on Repurposing the 600 MHz Band proceeding.\8\
Mexico has not yet put forward any public plans for repurposing the 600
MHz Band; as a result, for purposes of these simulations all Mexican
allotments are protected.\9\ Due to insufficient data at this time, the
simulations do not reflect any interference from Mexican TV stations
into the United States.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ We emphasize that this proposal remains pending and has not
been adopted by Industry Canada. We also note that, although
Canada's Consultation indicates it is considering pursuing a joint
repacking plan with the United States, for purposes of the
simulations we do not assume a joint repacking plan. See
Consultation on Repurposing the 600 MHz Band, Spectrum Management
and Telecommunications, Industry Canada, SLPB-005-14, para. 41 (rel.
December 18, 2014), http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10891.html (``Consultation on Repurposing the 600 MHz Band'').
\9\ See Incentive Auction R&O, 29 FCC Rcd at 6677-80, paras.
246-57.
\10\ We anticipate the Commission will have the data necessary
to make these calculations in advance of the incentive auction,
however. We note that including the predicted interference from
Mexican stations would increase the impairment level in each of the
scenarios. The simulations do reflect predicted interference from
Canadian TV stations into the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The simulations released with this document reflect three
different illustrative broadcaster participation scenarios: (1)
Participation by between 40 and 50 percent of broadcast stations; (2)
participation between 50 and 60 percent; and (3) participation between
60 and 70 percent. We emphasize that these simulations model only the
number of spectrum blocks that would be available under various initial
clearing targets that would be feasible based on broadcaster
participation in the auction. The simulations reflect no assumptions
about auction outcomes in terms of which reverse auction participants
would be selected as winning bidders, the winning bid amounts, the
total proceeds of the forward auction, or whether the Commission would
be able to close the auction at the initial clearing target.
4. For each of the three broadcaster participation scenarios, the
Appendix provides information on the number of spectrum blocks that
would be offered in the forward auction in each proposed license
category (including totals nationwide, in the high-demand markets,\11\
and by Partial Economic Area or ``PEA''), and the same breakdown
showing the total weighted-pops for the licenses in each category.
Under each scenario, the Appendix also shows results based on two
approaches to assigning impairing stations to the 600 MHz Band: (1) The
approach proposed in the Comment PN, under which the optimization
software assigns stations within the 600 MHz Band so as to minimize
impaired weighted-pops; and (2) an alternative approach that minimizes
impaired weighted-pops but restricts the software from assigning
stations to channels that could impair the duplex gap.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ ``High-demand markets'' is defined as the 40 largest PEAs
by population. Auction 1000 Comment PN, 29 FCC Rcd at 15770, para.
51. These markets are considered high demand because the geographic
areas they cover have usually generated the highest average prices
per MHz-pop in prior spectrum license auctions and accounted for a
substantial fraction of total auction revenues. Id.
\12\ Auction 1000 Comment PN, 29 FCC Rcd at 15765-66, paras. 35-
36. The Appendix refers to (1) as ``protecting the duplex gap'' and
the alternative approach as ``not protecting the duplex gap.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The simulations indicate that the procedure proposed in the
Comment PN for setting the initial clearing target, with the
modifications described above, results in the selection of an initial
clearing target of 84 megahertz in a scenario where 40 to 50 percent of
broadcasters participate in the reverse auction (Scenario 1); an
initial clearing target of 114 megahertz in a scenario where 50 to 60
percent participate (Scenario 2); and an initial clearing target of 126
megahertz in a scenario where 60 to 70 percent participate (Scenario
3). Under each scenario, the vast majority of the licenses offered in
the band plan associated with eachclearing target are Category 1
licenses.\13\ In Scenario 1, of the 2,842 possible
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ In each of the simulations, at least 93.4 percent of
licenses are Category 1 licenses, and Category 2 licenses comprise
at most 1.3 percent of total possible licenses. Under the Comment PN
proposal, ``Category 1'' licenses are licenses that contain
impairments affecting between zero and 15 percent of the population
in a PEA, ``Category 2'' licenses are licenses that contain
impairments affecting greater than 15 percent but less than or equal
to 50 percent of the population, and licenses with impairments
affecting more than 50 percent of the population would not be
offered in the auction. See Auction 1000 Comment PN, 29 FCC Rcd at
15797-98, paras. 145-46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30023]]
licenses,\14\ only 46 are Category 2 licenses. For Scenario 2, of the
3,654 possible licenses, only 50 are Category 2 licenses. And for
Scenario 3, of the 4,060 possible licenses, only 48 are Category 2
licenses. In all three scenarios, 88 to 93 percent of the licenses in
the high-demand markets are Category 1 licenses and 84 to 88 percent of
PEAs contain only Category 1 licenses.\15\ The results also reflect
that, in lower broadcaster participation scenarios, excluding stations
altogether from the duplex gap would increase the number of Category 2
licenses and heavily impaired licenses that the Commission proposed not
to offer in the incentive auction.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ We note that for purposes of this impairment analysis, the
total number of licenses analyzed at each clearing target level
includes only those licenses that could be offered in the
continental United States.
\15\ For example, out of 406 PEAs, all but 62 will have only
Category 1 licenses in the 84 megahertz initial clearing target
scenario. The same is true for all but 53 in the 114 megahertz
scenario and all but 47 in the 126 megahertz scenario. The total
number of PEAs is 416, but the simulations results evaluate only
impairments that affect the 406 PEAs in the continental United
States. See generally Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Provides
Details About Partial Economic Areas, GN Docket No. 12-268, Public
Notice, 29 FCC Rcd 6491 (June 2, 2014). Further, under this
scenario, of the 2,654 Category 1 licenses, 2,535 are entirely free
of impairments (i.e. zero percent of the weighted-pops in the PEA
are impaired). In Scenario 2, of the 3,469 Category 1 licenses,
3,334 are entirely free of impairments and in Scenario 3, of the
3,886 Category 1 licenses, 3,753 are entirely free of impairments.
Once again, these totals reflect only those licenses that would be
offered in the continental U.S. that are subject to impairments.
\16\ In addition, the simulation results reflect that protecting
the duplex gap at lower participation scenarios would result in the
selection of lower clearing targets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Procedural Matters
6. This document is being issued pursuant to sections 0.31, 0.51,
0.61, and 0.131 of the Commission's rules by the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau and the Incentive Auction Task Force.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 47 CFR 0.31, 0.51, 0.61, 0.131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Ex Parte Rules--Permit-But-Disclose Proceeding
7. Pursuant to Sec. 1.1200(a) of the Commission's rules, this
matter shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in
accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex
parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the
Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list
all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at
which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data
presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the
presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data
or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments,
memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide
citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or
paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of
summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to
Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex
parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule Sec.
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule Sec. 1.49(f) or for which
the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing,
written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt,
searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
B. Paperwork Reduction Analysis
8. This document does not change, or propose to change, the
information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (``PRA''), Public Law 104-13, contained in the Incentive
Auction R&O.\18\ As a result, no new submission to the Office of
Management and Budget is necessary to comply with the PRA requirements.
In addition, it does not contain any new or modified ``information
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Incentive Auction R&O, 29 FCC Rcd at 6893, paras. 808-
09.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
9. The actions in this document have not changed, or proposed to
change, the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``FRFA''), which was
set forth in the Incentive Auction R&O.\19\ Thus, no supplemental FRFA
is necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Incentive Auction R&O, 29 FCC Rcd at 6893, para. 807.
Federal Communications Commission.
Roger Sherman,
Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
[[Page 30024]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.000
[[Page 30025]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.001
[[Page 30026]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.002
[[Page 30027]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.003
[[Page 30028]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.004
[[Page 30029]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26MY15.005
[[Page 30030]]
[FR Doc. 2015-12806 Filed 5-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-C