Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service, 51575-51581 [E7-17643]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 174 (Monday, September 10, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51575-51581]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17643]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MB Docket No. 87-268; FCC 07-138]


Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing 
Television Broadcast Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission adopts an Eighth Further Notice of Proposed 
Rule Making (Eighth Further NPRM), to announce tentative channel 
designations (TCDs) for three new permittees that have recently 
attained permittee status. The Eighth Further NPRM identifies these 
permittees together with the channel we propose to assign the permittee 
and the specific technical facilities at which we propose to allow 
these stations to operate after the DTV transition. In addition, the 
Eighth Further NPRM identifies a number of proposals for revisions to 
the proposed DTV Table of Allotments and/or Appendix B reflected in the 
Seventh Report and Order that was adopted simultaneously with this 
Eighth Further NPRM. These proposed revisions were advanced by 
commenters in either reply comments or late-filed comments in response 
to the Seventh Further NPRM. As these comments propose changes to the 
DTV Table of Allotments and/or Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and 
Order that could affect other stations that may not have had adequate 
notice of these proposals, we identify these proposals to give affected 
stations an opportunity to comment.

DATES: Comments for this proceeding are due on or before October 10, 
2007; reply comments are due on or before October 25, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 87-268, 
by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
    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 Kim Matthews, of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, 
(202) 418-2120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal 
Communications Commission's Eighth Further Notice of Purpose Rulemaking 
in MB Docket No. 87-268, FCC 07-138, adopted August 1, 2007, and 
released August 6, 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 (https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will 
be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) 
The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. 
To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, 
large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an e-mail to 
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

Summary of the Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. The Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this 
proceeding, 71 FR 66592, November 15, 2006 (Seventh Further NPRM) 
finalized the DTV channel election process and began the final stage of 
the transition of the nation's broadcast television system from analog 
to digital technology. Although virtually all potentially eligible 
stations were assigned TCDs at that time, the Seventh Further NPRM 
noted that some applications for station licenses remained pending, and 
might be granted before the adoption of the Order in this proceeding. 
Some of these new permittee TCDs were granted too late to allow 
sufficient opportunity for public comment in the Seventh Further NPRM 
rulemaking. In addition, several commenters submitted requests for 
substantive modifications to the DTV Table of Allotments or Appendix B 
as in the Seventh Report and Order after the close of the comment 
period. The Commission therefore issues this Eighth Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, and solicits comment on the TCDs and modification 
requests discussed below. We emphasize that in this Eighth Further NPRM 
deals exclusively with the stations described below. All comments and 
reply comments should relate solely to the specific situations and 
issues raised herein. No further proposals for modification of the DTV 
Table of Allotments or Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order 
will be entertained during this pleading cycle, and no such proposals 
should be raised during the comment or reply period.

New Permittees

    2. As described in the Seventh Further NPRM, we are establishing a 
separate pleading cycle to give interested parties an opportunity for 
comment on new permittees that have attained permittee status too late 
to be considered in the Seventh Report and Order (published elsewhere 
in this issue). Three new

[[Page 51576]]

permittees have attained this status since we issued the New Permittees 
PN: Entravision Holdings, LLC, in Pueblo, Colorado (Analog channel 48), 
Richland Reserve, LLC in Greeley, Colorado (Digital channel 45), and 
Northwest Television, Inc. (Northwest Television) in Galesburg, 
Illinois (Digital channel 53). Post-transition, channel 48 in Pueblo 
would create no additional interference, and we therefore propose 
channel 48 as this station's TCD. Interference analysis indicates, 
however, that post-transition, channel 45 in Greeley would cause 0.3 
percent new interference. Therefore, we propose channel 49 as the TCD 
Richland Reserve, LLC. With respect to the new permittee in Galesburg, 
IL, because channel 53 is an out-of-core channel, an engineering 
analysis was conducted and it was determined that channel 8 is the best 
available post-transition channel in Galesburg. Channel 8 creates no 
new interference to the TCD of another full-power station but would 
interfere with licensed Class A Station WQFL-CA, Rockford, IL. However, 
WQFL has an application for a minor modification of license pending, 
which would require a waiver of the filing freeze but which, if 
granted, would eliminate the interference from channel 8. In order to 
locate an interference-free post-transition channel for Galesburg, we 
propose to grant WQFL-CA a waiver of the filing freeze and grant the 
WQFL-CA modification application, thereby resolving any potential 
interference, and propose channel 8 as the TCD for Northwest 
Television. These proposals will further amend the new DTV Table of 
Allotments. In addition, we propose the specific technical facilities--
effective radiated power (ERP), antenna height above average terrain 
(HAAT), antenna radiation pattern, and geographic coordinates--at which 
these stations would operate after the DTV transition. The attachment 
also includes information on predicted service area and population 
coverage. Consistent with the Seventh Further NPRM, the Commission 
hereby invites public comment on these proposed changes to the new DTV 
Table of Allotments.

Late-Filed Requests for Changes to the Table of Allotments and Appendix 
B

    3. As noted above, several stations filed requests for revisions to 
the proposed DTV Table of Allotments and/or Appendix B as in the 
Seventh Report and Order either during the reply comment period or 
after the close of the filing period. In order to facilitate a rapid 
transition, late-filed requests for minor adjustments or changes 
necessary for the station to replicate have been granted where they 
were unopposed and cause no impermissible interference to any other 
station. In some cases, although the Commission would have looked 
favorably on the proposal had it been timely filed, we find it 
necessary to provide a full opportunity to comment. This is 
particularly the case where the proposed changes to the DTV Table of 
Allotments and/or Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order could 
affect other stations. This Eighth Further NPRM identifies these late-
filed requested changes, and seeks comment.

1. Request To Make Changes That Meet the Interference Criteria

    4. WTXF, Philadelphia, PA. Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia, 
Inc. (Fox Philadelphia), licensee of station WTXF-TV, channel 29, and 
WTXF-DT, channel 42, Philadelphia, PA, received channel 42 for its TCD 
in the proposed DTV Table of Allotments. In late-filed comments, Fox 
Philadelphia asserts that the parameters described in Appendix B as in 
the Seventh Report and Order reflect out-of-date information, and 
requests that they be revised to match its CP for its authorized 
facility, which will replicate its analog facilities. Fox Philadelphia 
states that it is completing construction and expects to apply for the 
license to cover later this summer. We find analyzed the requested 
facilities for post-transition operation, and we find that WTXF would 
cause 1.31 percent interference to WMPT, Annapolis, MD (analog channel 
22, post-transition digital channel 42), 0.58 percent interference to 
WSAH, Bridgeport, CT (analog channel 43, post-transition digital 
channel 42), and 0.86 percent interference to WNJT, Trenton, NJ (analog 
channel 52, post-transition digital channel 43). Because this request 
was filed too late to ensure a full opportunity for comment, and 
particularly in light of the predicted interference, we invite comment 
on this request in this Eighth Further NPRM.
    5. WDCA, Washington, DC. Fox Television Stations, Inc., (Fox), 
licensee of station WDCA-TV, channel 20, and WDCA-DT, channel 35, 
Washington DC, received channel 35 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table of Allotments. Fox filed late comments requesting that the 
Commission modify Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order to 
reflect WDCA's actual, authorized facilities. WDCA-DT has a 
construction permit, FCC File No. BMPCDT-20060519ACK, that specifies 
facilities at its main studio where WDCA-DT is currently ``located, 
authorized and operating,'' and WDCA-DT has applied for a license to 
cover that Construction Permit, FCC File No. BLCDT-20070411AAH. As 
noted by Fox, previous engineering analysis had indicated that this 
location and these parameters cause no impermissible interference. The 
Commission proposes to grant this request and adjust the DTV Table of 
Allotments and Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order 
accordingly. Therefore, we solicit comments on this proposal.

2. Request for Modified Coverage Area

    6. KOAM, Pittsburg, KS. Saga Quad States Communications (Saga), 
licensee of station KOAM-TV, channel 7, and KOAM-DT, channel 13, 
Pittsburg, KS, received channel 7 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table 
of Allotments. Saga states that its current Appendix B as in the 
Seventh Report and Order parameters would allow it to reach only 83 
percent of the audience it currently serves with its analog signal. 
Saga requests a revision to specify directional facilities for KOAM at 
an ERP of 15.33 kW, in order to more closely replicate its analog Grade 
B contour. Saga's internal engineering study indicates that use of a 
directional antenna would prevent any station from receiving 
impermissible interference, while still allowing KOAM to reach 94.4 
percent of people reached by its analog transmitter, an outcome it 
argues is in the public interest. We have analyzed KOAM's request and 
recalculated their Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order 
facilities based on replicating the analog coverage that was used to 
determine their initial DTV Table of Allotments facilities. We propose 
to adjust the DTV Table of Allotments and Appendix B as in the Seventh 
Report and Order accordingly and solicit comments on this proposal.

3. Requests for Alternative Channel Assignments

    7. KOLO, Reno, NV. Gray Television Licensee, Inc. (Gray), licensee 
of station KOLO-TV, channel 8, and KOLO-DT, channel 9, Reno, NV, 
received channel 9 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table of Allotments. 
Gray currently broadcasts from the same antenna on its NTSC channel 8 
and DTV channel 9. Gray states that its antenna has been optimized for 
channel 8 for over 45 years, and Gray expresses concern that attempting 
to retune the antenna for use on its TCD channel 9 could lead to 
serious engineering difficulties. Gray therefore requests that KOLO's 
TCD be changed to permit it to return to its NTSC channel 8 post-
transition. Engineering analysis indicates that this proposal by Gray 
would cause no additional interference. The Commission proposes to 
grant this

[[Page 51577]]

request and adjust the DTV Table of Allotments and Appendix B as in the 
Seventh Report and Order accordingly. Therefore, we solicit comments on 
this proposal.
    8. WEHT, Evansville, IN. Gilmore Broadcasting Corporation 
(Gilmore), licensee of station WEHT, channel 25, and WEHT-DT, channel 
59, Evansville, IN, received channel 25 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table of Allotments. Gilmore filed reply comments stating that WEHT 
could not serve its entire analog area using the TCD and parameters in 
the DTV Table of Allotments and Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and 
Order. It proposes to change its TCD to channel 7 and adjust its 
parameters. Gilmore states that these proposed changes will increase 
its service area and eliminate the interference with WRTV-DT 
Indianapolis, IN (analog channel 6, post-transition digital channel 25) 
that would be caused by operating on channel 25. Engineering analysis 
shows that Gilmore's proposed alternative channel would cause no 
additional interference. The Commission proposes to grant this request 
and adjust the DTV Table of Allotments and Appendix B as in the Seventh 
Report and Order accordingly. Therefore, we solicit comments on this 
proposal.
    9. KTRV, Nampa, ID. Idaho Independent Television, Inc. (IIT), 
licensee of KTRV, channel 12, and KTRV-DT, Nampa, Idaho, received 
channel 12 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table of Allotments. IIT 
filed late comments stating that it wishes to retain its existing DTV 
facilities for post-transition operation, and requests that Appendix B 
as in the Seventh Report and Order be revised to reflect those 
facilities. IIT requests its TCD be changed to channel 13 and its 
antenna ID to 28309. IIT states ``[t]hese licensed facilities already 
have passed Canadian review once before, so further international 
coordination should be minimal.'' IIT makes no representation, however, 
about post-transition interference. In response to IIT's request, we 
studied KTRV's post-transition operation on channel 13 and propose to 
grant their requested channel change. We seek comment on this proposal.
    10. WUOA, Tuscaloosa, AL. The University of Alabama, singleton 
licensee of analog station WUOA, channel 23, Tuscaloosa, AL, received 
channel 23 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table of Allotments. The 
University of Alabama filed an ex parte in June 2007 seeking a channel 
change to a low VHF channel. The comment explained that the limited 
resources of the public university would be most efficiently used by 
broadcasting on a VHF channel, because of the lower cost of 
construction and operation of a VHF station as compared to a UHF 
station. We have considered and studied the University of Alabama's 
request, and propose replication facilities for WUOA on channel 6. 
Engineering analysis shows that this alternative channel will cause no 
additional interference. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal.

4. Other Requests

    11. WPCW, Jeannette, PA. CBS Corporation (CBS), parent company of 
the licensee of Station WPCW, channel 19, and applicant for 
construction permit for a DTV station on channel 49, Jeannette, PA, 
received channel 49 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table of 
Allotments. CBS requests a change in the parameters in the proposed 
Appendix B as in the Seventh Report and Order for WPCW to reflect those 
approved by the Commission in its 2006 decision amending the pre-
transition DTV Table of Allotments to substitute channel 49 for channel 
30 as the digital frequency for WPCW and reallotting DTV channel 49 
from Johnstown, Pennsylvania to Jeannette. Larry L. Schrecongost 
(Schrecongost), licensee of Class A television Station WLLS, channel 
49, Indiana, Pennsylvania, opposes the CBS request and argues that the 
proposed DTV Table of Allotments should specify channel 30 rather than 
channel 49 for WPCW. Schrecongost has also filed a petition for 
reconsideration of the 2006 Report and Order, 71 FR 8986, February 22, 
2006, which is currently pending.
    12. In 1999, the former licensee of WPCW filed a petition for rule 
making seeking to modify the station's DTV allotment from channel 30 to 
channel 49 and to change the station's digital community of license 
from Johnstown to Jeannette. That petition was subsequently amended to 
specify a new reference site. The petition for rule making was pending 
at the time the former licensee of WPCW certified to replication on FCC 
Form 381. Based on the pending rule making, WPCW elected channel 49 in 
the first round of the channel election process. The Seventh Further 
NPRM specifies channel 49 for WPCW but lists technical parameters 
consistent with replication on channel 49 of the WPCW initial DTV 
allotment which was based on its analog facility. In the 2006 Report 
and Order, the Commission granted the WPCW rule making petition and, in 
addition to the channel change from 30 to 49, the Commission approved 
the requested site change for WPCW as well as an increase in ERP and 
other technical changes.
    13. CBS argues in its comments that the DTV Table of Allotments 
should reflect the revised parameters approved for WPCW in the 2006 
Report and Order. Schrecongost argues that the Commission erred in 
granting the channel change and site change for WPCW as operation of 
that station on channel 49 in Jeannette would cause interference to 
WLLS in violation of the Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999 
(CBPA). The CBPA gave certain low power television (LPTV) stations, 
known as Class A stations, some limited protection from interference by 
full-service stations.
    14. We have determined that operation of WPCW on channel 49 at the 
site and parameters approved in the 2006 Report and Order would cause 
interference to the TCDs of two full-power stations in excess of the 
0.1 percent standard for new interference that applies during the 
channel election process. Specifically, operation of WPCW on channel 49 
would cause 1.61 percent new interference to WTAP, Parkersburg, WV 
(analog channel 15, post-transition digital channel 49), and 0.7 
percent new interference to WPXI, Pittsburgh, PA (analog channel 11, 
post-transition digital channel 48).
    15. In light of the interference caused by WPCW on channel 49, we 
propose to provide WPCW with an alternative channel that would resolve 
this interference. Specifically, we propose to allot channel 11 to WPCW 
with the site location specified in the 2006 Report and Order. The 
specific technical facilities we propose for WPCW on channel 11 at this 
location are reflected in Appendix G, infra. Our analysis shows that 
operation of WPCW on channel 11 will not cause interference to the 
post-transition facilities of full power stations, nor to WLLS, the 
Class A station.
    16. We believe that this proposal is consistent with our objectives 
in this proceeding. Operation of WPCW on channel 11 instead of channel 
49 would reduce the interference caused to other facilities, consistent 
with our goal of efficient spectrum use. In addition, changing the WPCW 
allotment from channel 49 to channel 11 would resolve the challenge by 
Class A station WLLS to the decision reached in the 2006 Report and 
Order. Resolving this challenge avoids a potentially protracted appeal 
of the 2006 Report and Order and furthers our goal of finalizing DTV 
channels and facilities to permit stations to construct their post-
transition facilities by the rapidly approaching transition deadline.

[[Page 51578]]

    17. WGNO and WNOL, New Orleans, LA. Tribune (licensee of station 
WGNO, channel 26, permittee of WGNO-DT, channel 15, with TCD on channel 
26, New Orleans, LA, and station WNOL, channel 38, and permittee of 
WNOL-DT, channel 40, New Orleans, LA, with TCD on channel 15) filed 
late comments requesting a change in technical parameters for both 
stations. Tribune proposes to operate both WGNO and WNOL from the WDSU 
transmitter site and tower, 3.7 km from the WGNO/WNOL transmission site 
destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Tribune proposes that WGNO and WNOL 
will share the antenna with WDSU (analog channel 6, pre- and post-
transition digital channel 43). Tribune contends that operating their 
stations from this site will streamline their application process and 
allow Tribune to restore digital service to the New Orleans market more 
quickly.
    18. We have considered and studied Tribune's request, and we find 
that the proposed parameters do not cause impermissible interference to 
any station. However, we find that the proposed parameters for both 
stations would exceed their authorized contours, in violation of the 
freeze. In light of the unusual circumstances that affect these 
stations due to the destruction of both stations' analog and digital 
facilities, and the licensee's desire to relocate the transmitter to 
reduce the risk of damage from future hurricanes, we propose to waive 
the freeze and substitute the technical parameters requested in the 
late-filed comments. We seek comment on this proposal.

Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    19. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 
the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(FRFA) relating to this Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    20. This Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking has been 
analyzed with respect to the PRA and does not contain proposed 
information collection requirements. In addition, therefore, 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.

Ex Parte Rules

    21. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding will be treated as a 
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding subject to the ``permit-but-
disclose'' requirements under Sec.  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 Sec.  
1.1206(b).

Filing Requirements

    22. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of 
the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments on or 
before October 10, 2007; reply comments are due on or before October 
25, 2007 using: (1) The Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System 
(ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by 
filing paper copies.
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Filers 
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting 
comments.
     For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit 
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, 
filers should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following 
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
     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 must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    23. 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.
    24. Accessibility Information. To request information in accessible 
formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and 
Braille), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the FCC's Consumer 
and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-
0432 (TTY). This document can also be downloaded in Word and Portable 
Document Format (PDF) at: https://www.fcc.gov.

Additional Information

    25. For more information on this Seventh Report and Order and 
Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, please contact Kim 
Matthews, Policy Division, Media Bureau at (202) 418-2154, Gordon 
Godfrey, Engineering Division, Media Bureau at (202) 418-2193, or 
Nazifa Sawez, Engineering Division, Media Bureau at (202) 418-7059.

[[Page 51579]]

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    26. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA) the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the 
policies and rules proposed in this Eighth Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking. 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 on the Eighth Further NPRM provided in 
paragraph 163 of the item. The Commission will send a copy of the 
Eighth Further NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the 
Eighth Further NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published 
in the Federal Register.

A. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rules

    27. The Eighth Further NPRM proposes modifications to the new Post-
Transition Table of DTV Allotments and Appendix B as in the Seventh 
Report and Order (DTV Table of Allotments). Three new full power 
permittees and six existing full power licensees and permittees are 
provided with channels and parameters for digital broadcast operations 
after the DTV transition. Changes to the new post-transition DTV Table 
of Allotments affects full power commercial and noncommercial broadcast 
television stations as the new DTV Table of Allotments provides post-
transition channels for all eligible full power stations and changes to 
the DTV Table of Allotments may have interference or other implications 
for other broadcasters in the DTV Table of Allotments.
    28. The Commission announced in the Seventh Further NPRM that, to 
the extent possible, it would accommodate future new permittees in the 
new Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments, but that it would provide 
an opportunity for public comment before doing so. Three new 
construction permits were issued to permittees too late to be offered 
for comment in an earlier Public Notice, but can be accommodated in the 
new DTV Table of Allotments without causing impermissible interference. 
Six existing licensees and permittees made late-filed requests for 
modifications to the new DTV Table of Allotments. Although these 
requested changes are unopposed, appear non-controversial, and would 
have been looked upon favorably had they been timely-filed, we find it 
appropriate to provide a full opportunity for comment.
    29. We believe these proposed modifications to the new Post-
Transition Table of DTV Allotments support the goals set forth for the 
channel election process. By these proposed modifications, the new 
permittees are provided with channels for DTV operations after the 
transition. Where adjustments bring the DTV Table of Allotments into 
line with the facilities or service areas of existing licensees or 
permittees, they recognize industry expectations and respect 
investments already made. These proposals also move the overall Post-
Transition Table of DTV Allotments more quickly towards finality 
without sacrificing clarity or transparency. Finally, we believe the 
proposed changes reflects our efforts to promote overall spectrum 
efficiency and, in particular, to ensure the best possible DTV service 
to the public.

B. Legal Basis

    30. The authority for the action proposed in this rulemaking is 
contained in sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 5(c)(1), 7, 301, 302, 303, 307, 
308, 309, 316, 319, 324, 336, and 337 of the Communications Act of 
1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (j), 155(c)(1), 157, 301, 302, 303, 
307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 324, 336, and 337.

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

    31. 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. The proposed rules in this Eighth Further NPRM, if adopted, will 
primarily affect television stations. A description of such small 
entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such small entities, 
is provided below.
    32. Television Broadcasting. The proposed rules and policies in 
this Eighth Further NPRM 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.
    33. 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.
    34. Class A TV, LPTV, and TV translator stations. The rules and 
policies proposed in this Eighth Further NPRM do not directly affect 
low power television stations, as the DTV Table of Allotments to which 
changes are being proposed will finalize post-transition digital 
channels only for full power television stations. Nonetheless, as 
discussed in section E, infra, low power

[[Page 51580]]

television stations will also eventually transition from analog to 
digital technology and may be indirectly affected by the channel 
allotment decisions herein. The broadcast stations indirectly affected 
include 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.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    35. The proposals set forth in this Eighth Further NPRM would 
involve no changes to reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance 
requirements beyond what is already required under the current 
regulations.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and 
Significant Alternatives Considered

    36. 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.
    37. The proposed changes will allow the new Post-Transition Table 
of DTV Allotments to provide all eligible broadcast television 
stations--large and small alike--with channels for post-transition DTV 
operations. No distinction was made between large and small licensees 
and permittees when determining which proposals to include in the 
Eighth Further NPRM. Small broadcasters, just like large ones, 
benefited from participating in the channel election process, and had 
an equal opportunity to review the proposed DTV Table of Allotments and 
request modifications. The TCDs and parameters proposed are based 
almost entirely on elections by licensees. All stations affected by the 
proposals in the Eighth Further NPRM will have the opportunity to 
comment, and the Commission will consider all comments, including those 
proposing alternative allotments for specific stations. No alternative 
to existing proposals for specific modifications to the DTV Table of 
Allotments for purposes of DTV allotments are proposed herein. In 
general, the transition procedures utilized in selecting final DTV 
allotments have been sufficiently transparent and flexible and eligible 
applicants for post-transition DTV allotments have been provided with 
the opportunity to make elections and to suggest alternative 
allotments.
    38. The Eighth Further NPRM invites comment from broadcasters, 
including small broadcasters, on the proposed modifications to the new 
Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments. In addition, we invite comment 
on other ways in which we could consider the particular needs and 
interests of small businesses in finalizing the Post-Transition Table 
of DTV Allotments.
    39. The new DTV Table of Allotments for which the Eighth Further 
NPRM proposes modifications does not provide for channels for low power 
television stations. The Commission will address the digital transition 
for low power television (LPTV) stations in a separate proceeding. The 
statutory transition deadline established by Congress in 2006--February 
17, 2009--applies only to full-power stations. One of the Commission's 
goals in this proceeding is to permit full power stations to finalize 
their post-transition facilities by this rapidly approaching deadline. 
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. The Commission has 
stated that the intent is to ensure that low power and translator 
stations not be required to prematurely convert to digital operation in 
a manner that could disrupt their analog service or, more importantly, 
that might cause them to cease operation. 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. The Commission has recognized that low 
power television stations are a valuable component of the nation's 
television system and has stated its intention to facilitate, wherever 
possible, the digital transition of these stations.

F. Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Commission's Proposals

    None.

Ordering Clauses

    40. It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in 
sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 7, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 
324, 336, and 337 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C 151, 
154(i) and (j), 157, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 324, 336, 
and 337, this Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
    41. It is further ordered that pursuant to the authority contained 
in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, 303a, 303b, and 307 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 303a, 303b, and 307, the 
Commission's rules are hereby amended as set forth in Appendix A.
    42. It is further ordered that the rules as revised in Appendix A 
of the Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of Proposed 
Rule Making shall be effective October 10, 2007.
    43. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.
    It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of this 
Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule 
Making in a report to be sent to Congress and the General Accounting 
Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A).

[[Page 51581]]

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television.

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 to read 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. Section 73.622 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.622  Digital television table of allotments.

* * * * *
    (i) Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Community                           Channel No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA
  Tuscaloosa............................................               6
COLORADO
  Greeley...............................................              49
  Pueblo................................................              48
IDAHO
  Nampa.................................................              13
ILLINOIS
  Galesburg.............................................               8
INDIANA
  Evansville............................................               7
NEVADA
  Reno..................................................               8
PENNSYLVANIA
  Jeannette.............................................              11
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note: The following Appendix will not appear in the Code of 
Federal Regulations.

Appendix G--Proposed DTV Table of Allotments Information

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       NTSC                                                   DTV
                                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Facility ID                     State                  City                                                                                                              Percent
                                                                                       Chan     Chan   ERP (kW)    HAAT    Antenna    Latitude    Longitude     Area    Population  interference
                                                                                                                   (m)       ID       (DDMMSS)    (DDDMMSS)   (sq km)   (thousand)    received
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
77496.................................  AL..............  Tuscaloosa...............       23        6       1        266     80096       330315       873257    18093          595           0
166510................................  CO..............  Greeley..................  .......       49    1000        382  ........       402448      1041940    32251         2400           0
166331................................  CO..............  Pueblo...................       48       48      50        695     80244       384442      1045137    20898          906           0.8
51567.................................  DC..............  Washington...............       20       35     500        227  ........       385722       770459    20241         6949           0.2
28230.................................  ID..............  Nampa....................       12       13      17        829  ........       434518      1160552    41141          555           0
81946.................................  IL..............  Galesburg................  .......        8      15        333     80193       411844       902245    24719          795           0.7
24215.................................  IN..............  Evansville...............       25        7       3.2      301     80191       375157       873404    21506          699           0.1
58552.................................  KS..............  Pittsburg................        7        7      15.5      332     80204       371315       944225    29053          543           0.7
54280.................................  LA..............  New Orleans..............       38       15     775        286     80216       295659       895728    24543         1724           0
72119.................................  LA..............  New Orleans..............       26       26    1000        286     80217       295659       895728    24703         1734           0
63331.................................  NV..............  Reno.....................        8        8      15.6      893     80185       391849      1195300    39660          667           2.6
69880.................................  PA..............  Jeannette................       19       11       6.5      303     80099       402334       794654    21639         2960           0.1
51568.................................  PA..............  Philadelphia.............       29       42    1000        281     43286       400226       751419    20599         7425           6.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E7-17643 Filed 9-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P