[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15125-15128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07394]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MB Docket Nos. 18-63, 17-105; FCC 19-17]


Streamlined Reauthorization Procedures for Assigned or 
Transferred Television Satellite Stations; Modernization of Media 
Regulation Initiative

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopts streamlined procedures for reauthorizing television 
satellite stations when they are assigned or transferred. This document 
continues the Commission's efforts to modernize its regulations and 
reduce unnecessary requirements that can impede competition and 
innovation in the media marketplace.

DATES: This rule is effective May 15, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Salovaara, Industry Analysis 
Division, Media Bureau, FCC, at [email protected] or (202) 418-
2330.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, FCC 19-17, in MB Docket Nos. 18-63, 17-105, adopted on March 
11, 2019, and released on March 12, 2019. The complete text of this 
document is available electronically via the search function on the 
FCC's Electronic Document Management System (EDOCS) web page at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/. The document is also available for public 
inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC 
Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554. 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 FCC's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 
(TTY).

Synopsis

    1. Introduction: In this Report and Order, the Commission adopts 
streamlined procedures for reauthorizing television satellite stations 
when such stations are assigned or transferred. The revised process 
will reduce the costs and burdens currently associated with 
transferring existing satellite stations. In a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM), 83 FR 15531 (April 11, 2018), the Commission 
proposed to streamline this reauthorization process in order to 
eliminate potentially needless regulatory expense and delay. In 
response, commenters unanimously agree that the reauthorization process 
is unnecessarily costly and burdensome for both the station owner and 
the Commission. The Commission's action to streamline this process 
stems from its initiative to modernize its media regulations, and it 
furthers those efforts by reducing unnecessary requirements that can 
impede competition and innovation in the media marketplace.
    2. Background: Television satellite stations are full-power 
terrestrial broadcast stations authorized under part 73 of the 
Commission's rules. They generally retransmit some or all of the 
programming of another full-power television station, known as the 
parent station, which typically is commonly owned or operated with the 
satellite station. The Commission authorized television satellite 
stations initially in sparsely populated areas with insufficient 
economic bases to support full-service stations and then later in 
larger markets when a proposed satellite could not viably operate as a 
full-service station. Television satellite stations are excepted from 
the Commission's multiple ownership limits, most significantly the 
Local Television Ownership Rule. The ownership exception is set forth 
in Note 5 of 47 CFR 73.3555. In order for the exception to apply, a 
television station must obtain authorization from the Commission to 
operate as a satellite. If a licensee of a satellite station seeks to 
assign or transfer the license to a new owner that wishes to continue 
operating the station as a satellite, the Commission's current 
procedures require the applicants to the transaction to make the same 
showing that is required for initial satellite authorization. This 
showing is required in response to a question concerning compliance 
with the Commission's multiple ownership rules at Application for 
Consent to Assignment of Broadcast Station Construction Permit or 
License, FCC Form 314, Section III, Question 6.b., and at Application 
for Consent to Transfer Control of Entity Holding Broadcast Station 
Construction Permit or License, FCC Form 315, Section IV, Question 8.b.
    3. In 1991, the Commission revised the standards for television 
stations seeking to obtain satellite status and adopted a rebuttable 
presumption that stations would qualify for satellite status if: (1) 
There was no ``City Grade'' contour overlap between the parent and the 
satellite station; (2) the satellite station served an underserved 
area; and (3) no alternative operator was ready and able to construct 
or to purchase and operate the satellite station as a full-service 
station. The Commission established detailed evidentiary standards for 
meeting the second and third criteria. If an applicant did not qualify 
for the presumption, the Commission evaluated the proposal on an ad hoc 
basis and granted the application if there were compelling 
circumstances warranting approval. The Commission stipulated that 
owners of authorized satellite stations seeking to assign or transfer 
the station were required to demonstrate that the conditions under 
which the station had been accorded satellite status continued to exist 
at the time of the assignment or transfer.
    4. The transition to digital television service in 2009 rendered 
ineffectual the first prong of the Commission's presumptive standard as 
there is no precise digital counterpart to a station's analog City 
Grade contour. Accordingly, in its 2010/2014 media ownership review, 
the Commission clarified that, consistent with case law developed after 
the transition, it would evaluate all requests for new and continued 
satellite status on an ad hoc basis. As a practical matter, the second 
and third prongs of the Commission's presumptive standard continued to 
serve as guidelines under the ad hoc review. This shift in approach did 
not change the burden of proof for applicants seeking either an initial 
satellite station authorization or the continuation of existing 
satellite status in the transfer or assignment context.
    5. In May 2017, the Commission launched an initiative to review its 
media regulations and eliminate or modify rules that are outdated, 
unnecessary, or unduly burdensome. That review prompted the suggestion 
from broadcasters that the Commission streamline the process for 
demonstrating the continued eligibility of a television satellite 
station in connection with an assignment or transfer of such a station. 
Based on those suggestions, the Commission proposed to revise the steps 
required for

[[Page 15126]]

reauthorization of satellite status in the context of assignments and 
transfers and sought comment on all aspects of its proposal. Several 
broadcasters filed supporting comments, in which they assert that a 
streamlined process would reduce unnecessary costs and burdens for 
broadcasters, conserve Commission resources, and benefit consumers in 
underserved areas by encouraging investment in satellite stations. 
Although the Commission contemplated limiting its proposal to satellite 
stations sold in combination with their previously approved parent 
stations, commenters argue that any revised procedures also should 
apply when the assignment or transfer results in the satellite station 
combining with a different parent station. No comments were filed 
opposing the Commission's proposal to streamline the reauthorization 
process.
    6. Discussion: We adopt streamlined procedures for reauthorizing 
satellite status when the license of a television satellite station is 
assigned or transferred. Specifically, we allow the applicants to the 
transaction to use streamlined procedures in those situations where 
there has been no material change in the circumstances that warranted 
the grant of a station's existing authorization and upon submission of 
a complete copy of the most recent written Commission decision granting 
the satellite exception. For reasons explained below, we allow the 
applicants to use these streamlined procedures regardless of whether 
the satellite station that is the subject of the assignment or transfer 
application maintains the same parent station or becomes associated 
with a different parent station.
    7. This streamlined process will avoid the unnecessary expenditure 
of resources by both applicants and the Commission in situations where 
the facts and circumstances surrounding the station have not changed 
materially. The record demonstrates that the evidentiary showings 
currently required in connection with satellite station reauthorization 
often involve time and expense for both applicants and Commission 
staff. Commenters attest that it can cost several thousand dollars and 
many man-hours to prepare a reauthorization request, which typically 
can involve the services of lawyers, economists, engineers, and/or 
brokers. We conclude that these regulatory burdens are unwarranted in 
the absence of material change. Indeed, the Commission has no record of 
having ever denied a reauthorization request. We note further that 
declining populations in many rural areas make it likely that most 
satellite stations will continue to meet the reauthorization criteria. 
The revisions we adopt will reduce the burden on applicants but at the 
same time will not alter or limit the public's opportunity to object to 
a reauthorization request, as the procedures for doing so will remain 
unchanged.
    8. Notably, no commenter has presented any argument or evidence 
suggesting that our action will harm the public interest or contravene 
any Commission policy goals. To the contrary, the record enumerates 
several likely public interest benefits that should produce a positive 
outcome for broadcasters, consumers, and the Commission. The cost-
savings to broadcasters will reduce their regulatory expenses and allow 
them to invest their resources more productively. In addition, easing 
the transfer of satellite stations, and thereby promoting their 
viability, will benefit consumers in remote and underserved areas who 
are beyond the reach of the parent station's signal. Finally, a 
streamlined review process will enable the Commission to allocate its 
own resources more efficiently.
    9. As proposed in the NPRM, we permit applicants to a transaction 
involving a satellite station to avail themselves of our streamlined 
reauthorization procedures if they satisfy two conditions. First, the 
assignment or transfer application must include a certification by both 
parties to the transaction that the underlying circumstances upon which 
the Commission relied in granting the current satellite authorization 
have not changed materially since the issuance of the most recent 
satellite authorization. Second, the assignment or transfer application 
must include a complete copy of the most recent written Commission 
decision (e.g., Letter Order) granting the satellite exception. If the 
applicants cannot meet one of these conditions because there has a been 
a material change in circumstances or because they cannot locate the 
Commission's most recent written decision, then the streamlined 
procedures will not apply, and the applicants may apply for 
reauthorization in the same way as before with evidentiary showings 
that meet our ad hoc review criteria. If the Commission has issued a 
written satellite decision but the decision does not specify the facts 
and circumstances surrounding the grant or does not provide sufficient 
information from which to discern the Commission's basis for the grant, 
then the applicants should submit a standard reauthorization request 
instead of a streamlined request. The applicants may not avail 
themselves of the new streamlined procedures if the Commission did not 
identify in sufficient detail the facts and circumstances upon which it 
relied in approving the existing satellite exception because the 
constancy of those facts and circumstances would not be able to be 
certified or verified.
    10. Procedurally, applicants may submit the required materials--
both their certification and copy of the Commission's most recent 
written decision granting the previous satellite exception--as an 
exhibit to the relevant Commission form and in particular the question 
on the form that pertains to compliance with the Commission's multiple 
ownership rules (i.e., Application for Consent to Assignment of 
Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License, FCC Form 314, Section 
III, Question 6.b., or Application for Consent to Transfer Control of 
Entity Holding Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License, FCC 
Form 315, Section IV, Question 8.b.) The certification, for which both 
parties will be accountable, may entail a general statement that there 
has been no material change in the underlying circumstances upon which 
the Commission relied in granting the satellite station's most recent 
satellite exception. We do not require applicants to attest to a set of 
more specific facts as the certification, by its very terms, 
encapsulates the facts and circumstances existing at the time of the 
prior grant of the satellite exception and avows that those facts 
remain true at the time of assignment or transfer. We emphasize, 
however, that materiality certifications should be informed by the 
specific factors relied upon by the applicants and the Commission in 
the prior grant. In addition, applicants are welcome to add any 
explanatory details they consider helpful.
    11. Furthermore, we decline to restrict the term ``material 
change'' to specific, pre-defined situations. In particular, we reject 
the suggestion that the Commission consider all changes to be non-
material except when: (1) A satellite station seeks to modify its 
facilities voluntarily such that its service contour would exceed 20 
percent of the prior overlap with the parent station; (2) the seller 
has received a bona fide offer within the preceding three years to 
purchase and operate the satellite as a standalone station; or (3) 
information submitted to support an alternative showing has changed 
fundamentally. We fear such an approach might not be appropriate for

[[Page 15127]]

all reauthorization requests. We believe that the circumstances of each 
case should guide the determination of whether there has been a 
material change in the underlying circumstances upon which the 
Commission originally granted the existing satellite authorization.
    12. We conclude that requiring applicants to certify that no 
material changes have occurred and to attach the Commission's most 
recent written satellite authorization will provide sufficient 
information to allow Commission staff to determine if continued 
satellite status is appropriate and to enable interested parties to 
decide whether to object to a reauthorization request. Commission staff 
can ask the applicants to provide additional information if needed to 
reach a finding. As we explained in the NPRM, objections may be filed 
as part of the existing petition to deny and informal comment process 
applicable to all proposed license assignments and transfers of 
control. The applicants will have the opportunity to respond to an 
objection within the normal pleading cycle, and the Commission then 
will have a record upon which to make a determination. If an objection 
is filed, the Commission or its staff will issue a written 
reauthorization decision explaining its reasoning. Absent an objection, 
and if the Commission approves the transaction simply by issuing an FCC 
Form 732 rather than by rendering a letter decision, the Commission 
will not issue a separate written ruling addressing the reauthorization 
request. In those cases, we will follow commenters' suggestion to 
memorialize the reauthorization decision in the ``Special Conditions'' 
section of the FCC Form 732 approving the transaction. We will include 
a brief statement that the reauthorization grant is based upon both 
parties' certification and may add any necessary or helpful explanatory 
details, such as a cross-reference to the prior grant of the satellite 
exception upon which the applicants rely. When satellite stations that 
have been reauthorized in this manner are assigned or transferred in 
the future, the applicants to those transactions should attach the most 
recent written decision the Commission or staff issued that specifies 
the operative facts and circumstances that provided the basis for 
approval of satellite status. The applicants also should provide the 
dates of any intervening Commission reauthorizations memorialized on 
FCC Form 732 approvals, but the FCC Form 732 itself shall not 
constitute a decision upon which an applicant may rely in requesting 
streamlined reauthorization. If there has been no material change in 
the underlying circumstances supporting the Commission's or staff's 
most recent written decision, then that decision remains relevant and 
useful even if it also was used to support previous reauthorizations 
and may be many years old.
    13. We adopt these streamlined procedures regardless of whether the 
identity of the parent station changes as a result of the transaction. 
In the NPRM, we sought comment on whether we should restrict any new 
streamlined reauthorization procedures to those transactions that 
involve the assignment or transfer of control of a satellite station in 
combination with its previously approved parent station. Commenters 
contend that our proposed streamlined procedures also should apply when 
the satellite station combines with a different parent station as a 
result of the transaction. They assert that the Commission determines 
satellite designations based on the conditions and characteristics 
related to the satellite station, not the parent station, and so the 
identity of the parent station should not affect the reauthorization 
decision. The Commission never has denied a satellite reauthorization 
request when the underlying transaction resulted in a different parent 
station, and interested parties would be able to raise any concerns 
about a proposed new combination. Our ad hoc review of reauthorization 
requests is guided by considerations of whether the satellite station 
serves an underserved area and whether it could survive as a standalone 
station. Because a reauthorization review focuses on the health and 
viability of the satellite station and provides ample opportunity for 
public comment, we agree with commenters that our streamlined 
procedures should apply regardless of whether the parent station 
changes or stays the same post-transaction.
    14. We conclude that this action to streamline the reauthorization 
process for television satellite stations will benefit broadcasters, 
consumers, and the Commission. Further, removing unnecessary 
constraints on the transferability of satellite stations is consistent 
with our efforts to modernize our regulations.

Procedural Matters

    15. Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification. The Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 604, as amended (RFA), requires that 
a final regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for notice and 
comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that ``the 
rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The RFA 
generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning 
as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small 
governmental jurisdiction.'' See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). In addition, the term 
``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business 
concern'' under the Small Business Act. See 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A ``small 
business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently owned and 
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).
    16. In this Report and Order, the Commission adopts streamlined 
procedures for reauthorizing television satellite stations when they 
are assigned or transferred. The revisions stem from an initiative the 
Commission launched in May 2017 to modernize its media regulations. 
Commenters in the proceeding assert that the Commission should 
streamline the process for demonstrating that a television satellite 
station remains eligible for satellite status in connection with an 
assignment or transfer of the station because, they contend, the 
current process is lengthy, costly, unnecessary, and serves no rational 
purpose. Indeed, the time and expense of filing satellite 
reauthorization requests may discourage potential purchasers of 
satellite stations, which typically are in rural and economically 
depressed areas and often in need of investment. The revised procedures 
are intended to reduce unnecessary regulation and regulatory burdens 
that can impede competition and innovation in the media marketplace.
    17. Specifically, if there has been no material change in the 
underlying circumstances since the Commission granted the current 
satellite authorization, the parties to the proposed transaction can 
certify to that fact instead of having to make the same type of showing 
required for the station's initial satellite authorization. In 
addition, a complete copy of the written Commission decision granting 
the current satellite exception must be provided with the assignment or 
transfer application.
    18. As transactions involving television satellite stations usually 
comprise a very small percentage of the total number of television 
transactions processed by the Commission and originate from a similarly 
small segment of the overall industry, the number of

[[Page 15128]]

small entities impacted will not be substantial for RFA purposes. 
Therefore, the Commission certifies that the rule changes adopted in 
this Report and Order will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The Commission will send a copy 
of the Report and Order, including a copy of this Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Act Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
SBA. This final certification also will be published in the Federal 
Register. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    19. Paperwork Reduction Act. The Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) approved non-substantive changes for the information collection 
requirements contained in this rulemaking on March 28, 2019 under OMB 
control number 3060-0031. See Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public 
Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork 
Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, we previously sought specific 
comment on how we might ``further reduce the information collection 
burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.'' See 
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
    20. Congressional Review Act. The Commission will send a copy of 
this Report and Order to Congress and the Government Accountability 
Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. See 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A).
    21. Ordering Clauses: Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to 
the authority found in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 303(r), 309, and 310 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 
154(j), 303(r), 309, and 310, this Report and Order is adopted.
    22. It is further ordered that this Report and Order, including the 
revisions to title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations shown below, 
shall be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, 
which shall be preceded by OMB approval of the modified information 
collection requirements adopted herein.
    23. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Act Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration.
    24. It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of 
this Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review 
Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    25. It is further ordered that, should no petitions for 
reconsideration or petitions for judicial review be timely filed, MB 
Docket No. 18-63 shall be terminated and its docket closed.

List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Television.

Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334, 
336, 339.


Sec.  73.3555  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  73.3555 in Note 5 by adding the phrase ``as further 
explained by the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 18-63, FCC 19-17, 
(released March 12, 2019),'' after the phrase ``(released July 8, 
1991),''.

[FR Doc. 2019-07394 Filed 4-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P