Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service, 54720-54773 [E7-18248]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 26, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54720-54773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-18248]



[[Page 54719]]

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

Part II





Federal Communications Commission





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



47 CFR Part 73



 Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing 
Broadcast Service; Proposed Rule and Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 26, 2007 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 54720]]


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

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: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission adopts a new Table of Allotments for digital 
television (DTV) providing all eligible stations with channels for DTV 
operations after the DTV transition on February 17, 2009. The new DTV 
Table accommodates all eligible broadcasters, reflects to the extent 
possible the channel elections made by broadcasters, and is consistent 
with efficient spectrum use. The new DTV Table finalizes the channels 
and facilities necessary to complete the digital transition and 
ultimately will replace the existing DTV Table at the end of the DTV 
transition. The existing DTV Table continues to govern stations' DTV 
operations until the end of the DTV transition.

DATES: Effective October 26, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Kim Matthews of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, 
(202) 418-2154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal 
Communications Commission's Seventh Report and Order 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 Seventh Report and Order

    1. In this Seventh Report and Order, the Commission adopts a new 
Table of Allotments for digital television (``DTV'') providing all 
eligible stations with channels for DTV operations after the DTV 
transition on February 17, 2009. The new DTV Table is the result of 
informed decisions made by eligible licensees and permittees during the 
Commission's channel election process. As the Commission stated in the 
Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding (71 
FR 66592, November 15, 2006) (``Seventh Further Notice''), in 
developing these final DTV allotments the Commission has attempted to 
accommodate broadcasters' channel preferences as well as their 
replication and maximization service area certifications (made via FCC 
Form 381). The DTV Table adopted herein reflects consideration of the 
comments filed in response to the Seventh Further Notice as well as our 
efforts to promote overall spectrum efficiency and ensure that 
broadcasters provide the best possible service to the public.
    2. In early 2006, Congress established February 17, 2009 as a new 
hard deadline for the end of the DTV transition and the end of analog 
transmissions by full power television broadcasters. In view of the 
short period of time remaining before this deadline, our goal has been 
to finalize DTV channels and facilities as expeditiously as possible to 
provide stations with the certainty they need to complete their digital 
build out, consistent with the interference and other standards set 
forth in the Seventh Further Notice.

Requests for Minor Adjustments

    3. We will make a variety of minor adjustments based on requests 
from commenters. We received comments filed on behalf of 22 stations 
requesting that we make minor adjustments to the station coordinates 
specified in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. We asked licensees to 
review the accuracy of their information contained in the proposed DTV 
Table Appendix B and comment on any inaccuracies or discrepancies in 
this information. In some cases, the station requested a change to 
conform to the coordinates reflected on a station authorization and/or 
the coordinates of the Antenna Structure Registration (``ASR'') for the 
station's tower. In circumstances where a station submitted a 
correction to the station's coordinates, the corrected coordinates are 
specified on a station license or construction permit, and the 
requested change did not result in a change of more than three seconds 
latitude or longitude for the station, we are making the requested 
correction. Accepting corrections to Appendix B of three seconds or 
less is consistent with the Commission's rules, which do not require a 
construction permit for such a correction before it can be licensed. 
Three seconds of latitude or longitude is approximately 200 to 300 
feet. The stations for which we make such a correction are listed in 
Appendix D1 hereto and the changes requested by those stations are 
reflected in DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein.
    4. We also received comments filed on behalf of stations requesting 
modification of the proposed DTV Table Appendix B in the Seventh 
Further Notice either to express a station's geographic coordinates in 
tenths of seconds in addition to the currently listed degrees, minutes, 
and seconds or to round to the nearest whole second rather than merely 
truncate the data. One such commenter argued that precision is 
important as even a small change in location data could have an impact 
on interference studies in light of the 0.1 percent interference 
standard. We note that a tenth of a second latitude or longitude is 
equivalent to approximately 10 feet.
    5. We find it is appropriate to round to the nearest whole second 
because the resources necessary to collect more precise data and revise 
the computer software that generates the Table would not be justified 
by the small difference in physical location. For those commenters that 
have requested a correction of their station coordinates and provided 
us with station coordinates expressed to the tenth of a second, we have 
revised DTV Table Appendix B to round the coordinates to the nearest 
whole second. The stations for which such a change is made are included 
in the list of stations in Appendix D1 herein.

Requests To Make Changes to Certification

    6. We are permitting changes to stations' facility certifications 
(FCC Form 381) based on appropriate demonstrations from these stations 
where such changes are consistent with the circumstances contemplated 
in the Seventh Further Notice. In paragraph 28 of the Seventh Further 
Notice, the Commission recognized that some stations have already 
constructed or received authorization to construct facilities on the 
station's TCD that provide service to areas that extend

[[Page 54721]]

beyond that to which the station certified on FCC Form 381. Because the 
interference protection provided during the channel election process 
was limited to the facilities to which the station certified in FCC 
Form 381, the Commission noted that stations serving or authorized to 
serve areas beyond their certified area could become subject to 
interference in those areas. The Commission stated that it would permit 
stations in this situation to file comments proposing to modify their 
certified facilities to match their authorized or constructed 
facilities. Stations requesting such a change were required either to 
(1) Submit an engineering analysis demonstrating that the proposed 
change to their certified facilities would not result in interference 
in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's existing TCD or (2) submit 
the signed, written consent of every affected licensee. The Commission 
also stated that stations in these circumstances seeking a change in 
their certification would be required to accept interference from any 
channel election already approved.

1. Requests That Meet the Interference Criteria

    7. We will permit stations to change their facility certifications 
(FCC Form 381), and thus our post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, 
where such stations have demonstrated that such modification of their 
facilities will conform to licensed or authorized facilities and where 
the proposed change to the Appendix B facilities either meets the 
interference criterion discussed above (i.e., the proposed change would 
not result in interference in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's 
existing TCD) or, as discussed further below, the station affected 
agreed to accept the interference. We received comments on behalf of 
130 stations requesting such changes. We have made the changes 
requested by these commenters and the changes are reflected in the 
revised DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein. A list of the stations for 
which we made these changes is attached hereto in Appendix D2. To 
address the requests of those commenters in this group whose stations 
are moving to a different channel for post-transition service, we 
recalculated their post-transition DTV coverage area based on their 
authorized or licensed DTV facility, as indicated by the file number 
shown in Appendix D2.
    8. In some cases, stations listed in Appendix D2 request changes to 
the DTV Table/Appendix B that differ from the facilities specified in a 
current authorization for the station on the post-transition channel. 
In these circumstances, we have revised DTV Table Appendix B to specify 
the station's authorized facilities. The following paragraphs describe 
three situations that merit additional explanation.
    9. KBCW, San Francisco, CA. San Francisco Television Station KBCW, 
Inc. (``KBCW''), licensee of station KBCW, channel 44, and KBCW-DT, 
channel 45, San Francisco, CA, received channel 45 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. In comments filed on behalf of KBCW, CBS 
Corporation (``CBS'') requests a change to conform to the parameters of 
KBCW's licensed facilities on Channel 45. CBS states that, along most 
azimuths, the currently licensed digital facilities of KBCW exceed 
those resulting from the replication facilities assigned to the station 
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. CBS states that an interference 
study shows that the requested KBCW parameters would cause in excess of 
0.1 percent new interference only to the digital operation of KQCA, 
Stockton, California. According to CBS, KQCA currently receives 0.46 
percent interference from KBCW-DT's presently licensed operation and 
would continue to do so after the transition if KBCW-DT keeps its 
existing facilities. CBS submitted an agreement in which KQCA agrees to 
accept this interference. In light of the interference agreement 
submitted by CBS, we will accept the requested change to the parameters 
for KBCW to conform to its authorized and operating facilities. These 
changes are reflected in the revised DTV Table Appendix B adopted 
herein.
    10. KALO, Honolulu, HI. Pacifica Broadcasting Company 
(``Pacifica''), licensee of station KALO(TV), channel 38, and KALO-DT, 
channel *10, Honolulu, HI, received channel 10 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. In a late-filed comment, Pacifica noted its concern 
that it may not be able to operate at its applied-for power level on 
channel 10 because it will cause an unacceptable level of interference 
to the FCC monitoring station at Waipahu. To address this anticipated 
difficulty, Pacifica has proposed a reduced ERP of 14.275 kW. This 
power level is less than the authorized power of the facility, but the 
reduction is necessary to prevent interference with our nearby 
monitoring facility. We have studied the proposed power and find that 
it does not cause impermissible interference to any station. We accept 
KALO's proposal and the DTV Table Appendix B has been revised 
accordingly.
    11. WPPB, Boca Raton, FL. The School Board of Broward County 
(``SBBC''), licensee of WPPB-TV, channel *63, and permittee of WPPB-DT, 
channel *40, Boca Raton, FL, received channel *40 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. In comments filed to this proceeding, SBBC supports 
the proposed allotment of channel *40, but asks to change its certified 
facilities and DTV Table Appendix B to reflect facilities authorized by 
the Commission in 2002. No other comments were filed related to this 
TCD.
    12. SBBC's request to change WPPB's DTV channel from *44 to *40 was 
approved in the 2002 Boca Raton Allotment Order. In that order, WPPB-
DT, channel *40, was authorized to operate at maximized facilities, 
including an ERP of 1000 kW and an antenna HAAT of 310 m. However, SBBC 
certified in its FCC Form 381 for maximized facilities as authorized by 
its existing construction permit for DTV channel *44. SBBC explained in 
its FCC Form 381 that it did this because the channel substitution 
decision was challenged by a petition for reconsideration and, thus, 
not deemed ``final.'' In its FCC Form 381, SBBC also stated its 
intention to certify for maximized facilities at the new channel *40 
allotment when the channel substitution became final. SBBC subsequently 
filed an application in 2006 to conform its new DTV channel *40 
allotment to those facilities specified in the 2002 Boca Raton 
Allotment Order.
    13. The proposed post-transition DTV Table now shows WPPB's new DTV 
channel *40. We hereby revise DTV Table Appendix B herein to reflect 
the facilities authorized by the 2002 Boca Raton Allotment Order. This 
change does not result in more than 0.1 percent new interference to any 
station. WPPB's requested certification change is to facilities 
expressly authorized to the station in 2002, and the station expressed 
its intent to certify to these facilities in its Form 381 filing.

2. Requests By Operating Stations That Do Not Meet Interference 
Criteria

    14. We will permit stations that are already operating their final, 
post-transition DTV facilities to change their facility certifications 
(FCC Form 381), and thus our post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, to 
reflect those facilities, even though such operations will exceed the 
0.1 percent interference standard. Eight stations requested changes to 
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to reflect operating facilities where 
we have determined that the interference caused to the TCD of another 
licensee exceeds the 0.1 percent interference standard and there

[[Page 54722]]

is no interference agreement with the affected station(s). In several 
cases, the Commission granted pending applications for these stations 
after certification. In other cases, as discussed further below, we 
have permitted stations to change their certification from replication 
to maximization, thereby potentially causing more interference to other 
stations than would have been permitted for the facilities to which the 
station originally certified.
    15. While these stations are requesting changes to the parameters 
proposed in the Seventh Further Notice in situations where the level of 
interference exceeds the relevant standard, we find that they have met 
their burden of demonstrating that their special circumstances justify 
a waiver. We therefore grant the requested changes. In each case, the 
changes are being requested for stations that are already operating 
their final, post-transition DTV facilities. We believe it is 
unnecessary and unfair to require these already-operational facilities 
to reduce service. Indeed, as these stations are already providing 
service at the requested parameters, it is in the public interest to 
allow them to continue to do so. In addition, none of the stations 
receiving the interference filed an opposition to the station 
requesting the change.
    16. Following is a brief discussion of the stations requesting 
changes to reflect their operating facilities and the relevant 
circumstances that support our grant of their requests:
    17. KTBN, Santa Ana, CA. Trinity Christian Center of Santa Ana, 
Inc. (``Trinity''), licensee of station KTBN-TV, channel 40, and KTBN-
DT, channel 23, Santa Ana, CA, received channel 23 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. Trinity requests that the parameters for KTBN in 
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the 
facility currently licensed in BLCDT-20050729AFT. The Commission's 
interference analysis shows that KTBN's licensed facility causes 0.75 
percent interference to KBEH, Oxnard, California (analog channel 63, 
digital channel 24 for both pre- and post-transition).
    18. WICS, Springfield, IL. WICS Licensee, LLC (``WICS Licensee''), 
licensee of station WICS, channel 20, and WICS-DT, channel 42, 
Springfield, IL, received channel 42 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (``Sinclair''), the parent 
company of WICS Licensee, requests that the parameters for WICS in the 
DTV Table Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the licensed 
facility BLCDT-20050627AAI. The Commission's interference analysis 
shows that the WICS licensed facility causes 0.43 percent interference 
to WICD, Champaign, Illinois (analog 15, post-transition digital 
channel 41).
    19. WUTV, Buffalo, NY. WUTV Licensee, LLC (``WUTV Licensee''), 
licensee of station WUTV, channel 29, and permittee of WUTV-DT, channel 
14, Buffalo, NY, received channel 14 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table. Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc., parent company of WUTV Licensee, 
requests that the parameters for WUTV in the DTV Table Appendix B be 
changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLCDT-20060829BGK. 
The Commission's interference analysis shows that the WUTV licensed 
facility causes 8.45 percent interference to the TCD on channel 14 of a 
new analog singleton in Bath, New York (call sign 870331LW). We note 
that, in its license application, WUTV indicated it would employ 
antenna beam tilting to protect the Bath station from interference and 
that the WUTV license specifies beam tilting.
    20. WKDH, Houston, MS. Southern Broadcasting Inc. (``Southern''), 
licensee of singleton station WKDH, channel 45, Houston, MS, received 
channel 45 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Southern requests 
that the parameters for WKDH in the DTV Table Appendix B be changed to 
reflect the parameters specified in its construction permit BPCDT-
20060519ABE. WKDH is now operating pursuant to program test authority. 
The Commission's interference analysis shows that WKDH causes 0.34 
percent interference to WPXH, Gadsden, Alabama (analog channel 44, 
digital channel 45 for both pre- and post-transition).
    21. WTEN, Albany, NY. Young Broadcasting, Inc. (``Young''), 
licensee of station WTEN, channel 10, and WTEN-DT, channel 26, Albany, 
NY, received channel 26 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Young 
requests that the parameters for WTEN in the DTV Table Appendix B be 
changed to reflect the parameters of the station's license BLCDT-
20060104ACC. The Commission's interference analysis shows that the WTEN 
licensed facility causes 3.24 percent interference to WHPX, New London, 
Connecticut (analog channel 26, post-transition digital channel 26) and 
1.39 percent interference to WFXV, Utica, New York, (analog channel 33, 
digital channel 27 for both pre- and post-transition).
    22. WLMB, Toledo, OH. Dominion Broadcasting, Inc., (``Dominion''), 
licensee of station WLMB, channel 40, and WLMB-DT, channel 5, Toledo, 
OH, received channel 5 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Dominion 
requests that the parameters for WLMB in the DTV Table Appendix B be 
changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLCDT-20050201AAF. 
Dominion failed to timely file a certification on FCC Form 381 for WLMB 
specifying whether it would construct replication or maximization 
facilities, and consequently WLMB was assigned replication facilities 
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. The Commission noted that forty-
one stations, including WLMB, did not timely file a certification form, 
and stated that it would permit these licensees to file comments 
proposing a change to their certification to specify maximized 
facilities for which they would have been allowed to certify. Dominion 
requests that its certification for WLMB be modified to specify the 
maximized facilities that Dominion has now constructed and that the 
Commission has licensed. The Commission's interference analysis shows 
that the WLMB licensed facility causes 2.04 percent interference to 
WGVK, Kalamazoo, Michigan (analog channel 52, digital channel 5 for 
both pre- and post-transition).
    23. KOCE, Huntington Beach, CA. KOCE-TV Foundation (``KOCE 
Foundation''), licensee of noncommercial educational station KOCE, 
channel *50-, and KOCE-DT, channel *48, Huntington Beach, CA, received 
channel *48 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. KOCE Foundation 
requests that the parameters for KOCE in the proposed DTV Table 
Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLEDT-
20041117ADG. KOCE Foundation failed to timely file a certification on 
FCC Form 381 for KOCE specifying whether it would construct replication 
or maximization facilities, and consequently KOCE was assigned 
replication facilities in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. This 
situation is similar to WLMB, paragraph 54, supra. The Commission noted 
that KOCE also did not timely file a certification form and stated that 
it would permit this licensee to file comments proposing a change to 
its certification to specify maximized facilities for which it would 
have been allowed to certify. KOCE Foundation requests that its 
certification for KOCE be modified to specify KOCE-DT's licensed, 
maximized facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows that 
the KOCE licensed facility causes 0.24 percent new interference to 
KAZA, Avalon, CA (analog channel 54, digital channel 47 for both pre- 
and post-transition).

[[Page 54723]]

    24. WLLA, Kalamazoo, MI. Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. 
(``Christian Faith''), licensee of station WLLA, channel 64, and WLLA-
DT, channel 45, Kalamazoo, MI, received channel 45 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. Christian Faith failed to timely file a 
certification on FCC Form 381 for this station. Stations that did not 
file certifications were assigned replication facilities for purposes 
of the Commission's channel election process and interference 
evaluation. On October 31, 2005, Christian Faith filed a request for 
acceptance of a late-filed certification on behalf of WLLA specifying 
maximization facilities authorized for that station. The proposed DTV 
Table Appendix B did not reflect this requested certification change. 
Christian Faith subsequently filed comments in response to the Seventh 
Further Notice requesting a change in the proposed DTV Table to reflect 
its construction permit for maximized facilities for this station. On 
May 29, 2007, Christian Faith filed a license application for WLLA for 
these maximized facilities. The authorized and operating maximized 
facilities of WLLA cause 2.11 percent new interference to WZPX, Battle 
Creek, Michigan (analog channel 43, digital channel 44 for both pre- 
and post-transition) and 0.79 percent new interference to WDIV, 
Detroit, Michigan (analog channel 4, digital channel 45 for both pre- 
and post-transition).
    25. For the reasons discussed supra, we hereby grant the changes 
requested for these eight stations and these changes are reflected in 
the DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein.

3. Requests By Non-Operational Stations That Do Not Meet Interference 
Criteria

    26. Comments were filed on behalf of two stations requesting 
changes to the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to reflect authorized 
facilities where we have determined that the interference caused to 
another licensee's existing TCD exceeds the 0.1 percent interference 
standard, there is no interference agreement with the affected 
station(s), and the station requesting the change is not operational. 
One of these stations, WTCV, San Juan, PR, has not met its burden to 
demonstrate that special circumstances justify a waiver, and we 
therefore deny its request to change DTV Table Appendix B. Unlike the 
stations discussed above, this station has not completed construction 
and begun DTV service to the public. We do not believe it is 
appropriate to change the facilities specified in DTV Table Appendix B 
where the station requesting the change does not meet the applicable 
interference standard and is not yet providing service to the public. 
We note that this station could apply in the future for a modification 
to specify maximized facilities. Any such application would be subject 
to interference criteria and other standards adopted in the Third DTV 
Periodic Review Report and Order. As discussed further below, for one 
station, WMFD, Mansfield, Ohio, we will grant the request to change DTV 
Table Appendix B because this station has obtained international 
coordination for its authorized facility.
    27. WTCV, San Juan, PR. International Broadcasting Corporation 
(``IBC''), licensee of station WTCV, channel 18, and WTCV-DT, channel 
32, San Juan, PR, received channel 32 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table. IBC states in its comments that it originally intended to 
operate its post-transition DTV transmitter from its current analog 
tower but was forced to change sites because of difficulties in 
obtaining tower space at its original site for its digital facilities. 
According to IBC, after lengthy negotiations with the tower site owner, 
Puerto Rico Telephone Company, ``it became clear that the tower 
structural requirements imposed at the time made the project 
economically unfeasible.'' IBC therefore certified to an authorized 
construction permit for a different site with substantially reduced 
facilities. In its comments IBC states that it has recently solved the 
difficulties of obtaining tower space to operate from its currently 
authorized analog site and has filed an application for a construction 
permit to operate from this site. This application was pending at the 
time IBC filed its comments in response to the Seventh Further Notice 
but has now been granted. IBC requests a change in the proposed DTV 
Table Appendix B to specify the parameters of the construction permit 
application that was pending at the time IBC's comments were filed and 
that has now been granted. IBC states that the proposed change in site 
and technical facilities will enable WTCV to serve an additional 
318,230 viewers. However, the WTCV facilities requested by IBC would 
cause 1.49 percent new interference to WSJU-TV, San Juan, Puerto Rico 
(analog channel 30, post-transition digital channel 31) and WTCV is not 
currently operational. As the facilities requested by IBC would cause 
new interference in excess of the 0.1 percent interference standard and 
the station is not yet providing service to the public, we will deny 
IBC's request to change DTV Table Appendix B.
    28. WMFD, Mansfield, OH. Mid-State Television, Inc., (``Mid-
State''), licensee of station WMFD-TV, channel 68 and WMFD-DT, channel 
12, Mansfield, OH, received channel 12 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table. Mid-State certified to a then-pending maximization application 
that had not yet been authorized due to international coordination 
issues. Mid-State states that, when it filed its pre-election 
certification, it indicated that it intended to operate with the 
facilities specified in the then-pending modification application, but 
that the application remained subject to international coordination. 
After certification, the application was amended to resolve the 
international coordination issues and subsequently was granted in July 
2005. The proposed DTV Table Appendix B specifies the facilities to 
which Mid-State certified. Mid-State requests that DTV Table Appendix B 
be changed to reflect the facilities specified in its July 2005 
construction permit. The facilities requested by Mid-State would cause 
1.13 percent interference to WINM, Angola, Indiana (analog channel 63, 
post-transition digital channel 12) and 0.44 percent interference to 
WBOY, Clarksburg, West Virginia (analog channel 12, post-transition 
digital channel 12). Neither of the affected stations filed comments 
opposing WMFD's proposed change to Appendix B.
    29. We will grant Mid-State's request and change DTV Table Appendix 
B accordingly. This change is reflected in the DTV Table Appendix B 
attached hereto. The change requested by Mid-State is the result of a 
negotiated solution with Canada to resolve international coordination 
issues that prohibit operation of the facility proposed in the 
application pending at the time of certification and to which Mid-State 
certified on FCC Form 381. The Commission has recognized that stations 
facing international coordination issues face unique challenges in 
completing the digital transition. As the result of a modification to a 
Canadian DTV allotment, WMFD states that it is precluded from 
constructing the facilities listed in the proposed DTV Table Appendix 
B. If we were to deny the change requested by Mid-State, WMFD would be 
required to identify a new facility and re-commence the process of 
obtaining international coordination for that facility. Because of the 
unique circumstances faced by WMFD, a station that is already providing 
digital service to the public

[[Page 54724]]

and seeks to improve that service, we believe that grant of the 
requested change to DTV Table Appendix B is warranted and will serve 
the public interest.

Requests for Modified Coverage Area

    30. We will grant requests filed on behalf of 30 stations whose 
post-transition DTV channel is different from their pre-transition DTV 
channel to change the coverage area in the proposed DTV Table Appendix 
B. In general, these commenters argue that the facilities specified in 
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B do not permit the station to provide 
service to the area served by the station's analog facility.
    31. In the creation of the initial Table of Allotments, DTV 
channels were chosen to allow service on the channel to best match the 
Grade B service contour of the analog station with which it was paired. 
Implementation of this replication goal requires a combination of 
transmitter site, ERP, directional antenna characteristics, and antenna 
height that is adequate to cover at least the same area as was served 
by the analog station. In the Sixth Report and Order in this docket (62 
FR 26684, May 14, 1997) (``Sixth Report and Order''), however, the 
Commission determined that the maximum permissible power for all 
allotments in the initial DTV Table would be 1000 kW. For some stations 
whose analog channel was in the VHF band and whose initial DTV channel 
was in the UHF band, an ERP of 1000 kW was not sufficient to permit 
replication of the station's analog service.
    32. On FCC Form 381, the Commission permitted stations the choice 
of certifying to operate their post-transition DTV station based on: 
(1) A current station authorization; (2) a pending application for 
maximization that had not been authorized due to a pending 
international coordination issue; or (3) replication facilities. 
Stations certifying to replication facilities that had not changed 
their DTV channel since the 1998 DTV Second MO&O (64 FR 4322, January 
28, 1999) (``Second MO&O'') had their replication facilities based on 
the facilities established in Appendix B of the Second MO&O.
    33. Several commenters argue that, because of the 1000 kW maximum 
imposed in the Sixth Report and Order, the Commission's decision to 
base replication during the channel election process on the station's 
initial DTV facilities established in the Second MO&O rather than the 
station's analog facilities resulted in the Commission proposing 
parameters in the DTV Table Appendix B that do not permit the station 
to replicate the analog service area. In other cases, stations filed 
comments requesting a change to the parameters in the proposed DTV 
Table Appendix B to modify the station's coverage area to permit 
replication of the station's analog coverage area where the station was 
not subject to the 1000 kW maximum imposed in the Sixth Report and 
Order. These stations, returning to their analog channel for post-
transition operations, commented that the proposed DTV Table Appendix B 
facilities would not permit replication of the station's analog Grade B 
contour. For stations returning to their analog channel, this 
discrepancy between the proposed Appendix B parameters and the analog 
coverage area may have been due to translation discrepancies that 
occurred over a series of engineering calculations used to determine 
replication. In other cases, stations simply requested an increase in 
power or a change to the station's antenna pattern to permit the 
station to serve more of the area served by the station's analog 
facilities.
    34. In response to the comments filed on behalf of these stations, 
we have recalculated Appendix B facilities based on replicating the 
analog coverage that was used to determine their initial DTV table 
facilities. If the recalculation would result in a reduction in the 
Appendix B facilities, we are adopting herein the larger Appendix B 
facilities that we had initially proposed in the Seventh Further 
Notice. If the recalculation would result in a larger coverage area and 
our analysis indicates that the recalculated facilities (1) Meet the 
0.1 percent interference standard specified in the Second DTV Periodic 
Report and Order (69 FR 59500, October 4, 2004) (``Second DTV Periodic 
Report and Order'') or (2) would cause more than 0.1 percent new 
interference but the affected station(s) agree to accept the 
interference, we are granting the request to change DTV Appendix B to 
reflect the larger coverage area. These stations are listed in Appendix 
D3 and the revised parameters for these stations are reflected in the 
revised DTV Table Appendix B, infra. There were no comments filed 
opposing these requested changes.
    35. We believe that permitting these changes to the proposed DTV 
Table is consistent with our overall goal in the DTV transition of 
encouraging replication of analog service. One of the Commission's 
objectives throughout the transition has been to permit broadcasters to 
reach with digital service the audiences they have been serving with 
analog service so that viewers will continue to have access to the 
stations that they are accustomed to receiving over the air. We believe 
that the revisions requested by the stations listed in Appendix D3 will 
serve the public interest by permitting those stations to provide 
digital service to more of their established analog viewers.
    36. In addition, three stations requested changes to the proposed 
DTV Table Appendix B to increase the station's coverage area, but our 
recalculations of the Appendix B facilities and the subsequent 
interference analysis show that the requested change would result in 
interference that would exceed the 0.1 percent interference standard 
adopted in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order and the affected 
station has not agreed to accept this interference. We deny the 
requests of these stations, as described in greater detail below. None 
of them are requesting changes to reflect DTV facilities they are 
operating or are authorized to operate. Consistent with our decisions 
above, we decline to change the facilities specified in DTV Table 
Appendix B where the station requesting the change does not meet the 
applicable interference standard and is not yet providing service to 
the public. We note, however, that each of these stations must file an 
application for authority to construct its post-transition facility, 
and at that time may be able, consistent with the procedures ultimately 
adopted in the Third Periodic Review proceeding, to specify facilities 
in that application that more closely approach the parameters requested 
in their comments. Following is a list of these stations and a 
description of their individual circumstances.
    37. WEDU, Tampa, FL. Florida West Coast Public Broadcasting, Inc. 
(``FWCPB''), licensee of NCE station WEDU, channel *3, and WEDU-DT, 
channel *54, Tampa, FL, received channel *13 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. FWCPB requests that the proposed DTV Table Appendix 
B be revised to specify omnidirectional facilities for WEDU at an ERP 
of 40 kW. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated 
Appendix B facilities shows that WEDU would cause 1.16 percent new 
interference to WTLV, Jacksonville, Florida (analog channel 12, post-
transition digital channel TCD channel 13).
    38. WGTV, Athens, GA. Georgia Public Telecommunications Commission 
(``GPTC''), licensee of NCE station WGTV, channel *8, and permittee of 
WGTV-DT, channel *12, Athens, GA, received channel *8 for its TCD in 
the proposed DTV Table. GPTC

[[Page 54725]]

requests that the proposed parameters in DTV Table Appendix B be 
changed to permit WGTV to increase power and operate with an 
omnidirectional antenna. The Commission's interference analysis based 
on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WGTV would cause 0.19 
percent new interference to WCIQ, Mount Cheaha, Alabama (analog channel 
7, post-transition digital channel 7).
    39. KOED, Tulsa, OK. Oklahoma Educational Television Authority 
(``OETA''), licensee of NCE station KOED-TV, channel *11, and KOED-DT, 
channel *38, Tulsa, OK, received channel *11 for its TCD in the 
proposed DTV Table. OETA requests that DTV Table Appendix B be revised 
to reflect an increase in antenna height for KOED. The Commission's 
interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows 
that the KOED would cause 0.16 percent new interference to KTUL, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma (analog channel 8, post-transition digital channel 10).

Requests for Alternative Channel Assignments

    40. We will grant certain stations' requests for an alternative 
channel assignment, consistent with our proposal in the Seventh Further 
Notice. In paragraph 25 of the Seventh Further Notice, the Commission 
stated that it would consider requests for alternative channel 
assignments only from the following: (1) Licensees unable to construct 
full, authorized DTV facilities on the TCDs that they requested and 
received because, in order to avoid causing impermissible interference 
to other TCDs and still obtain their preferred channel, they had to 
agree to construct facilities on their TCD that are smaller than those 
to which they had certified on FCC Form 381; (2) licensees with 
international coordination issues which the Commission has been unable 
to resolve with the Canadian and Mexican governments; (3) licensees 
with TCDs for low-VHF channels (channels 2-6); and (4) new licensees 
and permittees that attained such status after the start of the channel 
election process and to which we assigned a TCD for post-transition DTV 
operations because their assigned NTSC or DTV channel was determined to 
cause impermissible interference to existing licensees. The Commission 
stated that licensees that want to change their DTV allotment, but 
which are not in any of these categories (e.g., are technically able to 
construct their full, authorized DTV facilities on their existing TCD) 
may request a change in allotment only after the DTV Table is finalized 
and must do so through the existing allotment procedures.
    41. The Commission stated that any request for an alternative 
channel assignment must either meet the 0.1 percent additional 
interference standard or be accompanied by a request for a waiver of 
the 0.1 percent limit or the signed written consent of the affected 
licensee. The Commission stated that it would grant waivers of the 0.1 
percent limit where doing so would promote overall spectrum efficiency 
and ensure the best possible service to the public, including service 
to local communities.
    42. We received comments filed on behalf of 22 stations requesting 
a change in the channel assigned to the station for post-transition 
operation in the proposed DTV Table. For 13 of these stations, we will 
grant the requested channel change. A list of the stations for which we 
are granting an alternative channel appears in Appendix D5, infra, and 
we have revised the DTV Table for these stations accordingly. For each 
of these stations, we believe that the circumstances described by the 
station are consistent with one or more of the criteria for 
consideration of alternative channel assignments outlined in the 
Seventh Further Notice. Furthermore, none require waiver of the 0.1 
percent interference standard, because they either do not exceed that 
limit or have acquired the agreement of the affected station(s).
    43. For two stations, we deny the request for an alternative 
channel assignment. According to the Commission's interference 
analysis, the new channels requested by these stations cause 
interference to another station in excess of the 0.1 percent standard 
and there is no agreement with the affected station accepting this 
interference. As discussed below, we decline to waive our interference 
limit for these stations. Following is a brief discussion of these two 
stations and the relevant circumstances.
    44. KCWX, Fredericksburg, TX. Corridor Television LLP, Inc., 
(``Corridor''), licensee of singleton station KCWX, channel 2, 
Fredericksburg, TX, received channel 5 for its TCD in the proposed DTV 
Table. Corridor requests the substitution of channel 8 for its TCD of 
channel 5. Corridor recognizes that the allotment of channel 8 to KCWX 
would require a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard, but 
argues that grant of a waiver would contribute to clearing the lower 
VHF band so that it can be used for other purposes. In addition, 
Corridor states that it serves viewers in a rural area that rely more 
heavily on overthe-air signals and that channel 8 would result in fewer 
signal reception difficulties for these viewers than channel 5. 
Corridor also argues that operation on channel 8 would reduce its 
operating costs.
    45. Corridor argues that, with respect to new channel allotments 
after the transition, the Commission proposed to utilize an 
interference protection requirement based on engineering criteria 
(e.g., permissible interference), rather than geographic spacing, and 
to use an interference standard of 0.5 percent. Corridor argues that 
this proposed standard should be given significant weight in 
considering requests to waive the 0.1 percent standard in connection 
with the TCD selection process. The Commission's interference analysis 
shows that the requested change would cause 0.79 percent interference 
to KTBC, Austin, Texas (analog channel 7, post-transition digital 
channel 7) and 0.47 percent interference to NCE station KLRN, San 
Antonio, Texas (analog channel 9, post-transition digital channel 9). 
KTBC License, Inc., licensee of KTBC, filed an opposition to Corridor's 
request to waive the 0.1 percent interference limit. In addition, Alamo 
Public Telecommunications Council, licensee of KLRN, filed an 
opposition to Corridor's request, also arguing that Corridor should not 
receive a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard.
    46. We note that the 0.5 percent standard is only a proposal and a 
different standard could be adopted. Moreover, the new interference 
caused to KTBC, 0.79 percent, not only significantly exceeds the 
current 0.1 percent interference standard applied to channel 
substitution requests, it also exceeds even the proposed 0.5 percent 
standard. In view of the significant level of impermissible 
interference caused by the proposed KCWX channel substitution, we 
decline to waive our interference limit in this situation. We do not 
believe that a waiver in these circumstances would promote overall 
spectrum efficiency or ensure the best possible television service to 
the public or the local community.
    47. WMYT, Rock Hill, SC. WMYT-TV, Inc., (``WMYT''), licensee of 
station WMYT-TV, channel 55, and permittee of WMYT-DT, channel 39, Rock 
Hill, SC, received channel 39 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. 
WMYT requests the substitution of Channel 46 for its TCD of Channel 39. 
WMYT argues that Channel 46 is fully spaced to other stations, while 
Channel 39 is short-spaced to two stations. WMYT also argues that the 
station would cause less interference on Channel 46 at its preferred 
ERP than it does at the lower

[[Page 54726]]

assigned ERP on Channel 39. In addition, WMYT states that operation on 
Channel 46 would permit it to serve up to 500,000 additional viewers. 
The Commission's interference analysis shows that the requested change 
would cause 0.64 percent new interference to WYCW, Asheville, NC 
(analog 62, post-transition digital channel 45).
    48. In view of the level of interference caused to WYCW, we do not 
believe it is appropriate to waive our interference standard in this 
situation. The level of interference caused is far in excess of the 
applicable 0.1 percent standard. In addition, the new interference 
caused to WYCW of 0.64 percent exceeds even the 0.5 percent new 
interference standard we proposed apply to new channel allotments after 
the transition. As we concluded with respect to the proposed channel 
substitution of KCWX, supra, in view of the significant level of 
impermissible interference that would be caused by the WMYT request we 
do not believe that a waiver of our interference standard would promote 
our overall spectrum efficiency or ensure the best service to the 
public.

Additional Requests to Change Appendix B Facilities

Antenna Information

    49. We deny the requests of certain stations seeking to add antenna 
identification numbers to the proposed post-transition DTV Table 
Appendix B. Several stations requested that we change the proposed DTV 
Table Appendix B to include such antenna identification numbers. In 
developing the proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, we did 
not include any antenna identification number for stations operating 
with an omnidirectional antenna. An omnidirectional antenna provides 
the same power level in every azimuthal direction and antenna 
identification numbers are only used for directional antennas in order 
to determine the different power levels in each direction. Accordingly, 
where stations request the addition of an antenna identification number 
to Appendix B, we will not make that change if our database indicates 
that the station is authorized for an omnidirectional antenna.
    50. In addition, Scripps Howard Broadcasting requests that we 
change Appendix B for KNXV, Phoenix, Arizona and WCPO, Cincinnati, Ohio 
to reflect an antenna pattern value of ``1'' for 110 degrees. Trinity 
Broadcasting of Indiana, Inc. makes a similar request for WCLJ, 
Bloomington, Indiana. The channel allotments for KNXV and WCLJ are 
based on the use of omnidirectional antennas, so we will delete the 
antenna identification number in Appendix B for these stations. For 
WCPO, the correct 110 degree value of 1 was used when we generated 
Appendix B and we will correct the antenna pattern in the FCC's CDBS 
database. Finally, Griffin Tulsa II Licensing, LLC requests that we 
change Appendix B for KQCW, Muskogee, OK to reflect a relative field 
value of ``0.958'' instead of ``0.096'' in the reference pattern at 280 
degrees. We have made this change and it is reflected on Appendix B, 
infra.

Speculative Requests To Change Appendix B Facilities

    51. We reject the premature or incomplete requests of certain 
stations seeking changes to their facilities as proposed in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B when these changes pertain to 
speculative future events or could best be accomplished through the 
upcoming application process. These requests are not for modifications 
of the coverage area as defined by the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to 
match authorized or licensed coverage. Instead, these stations comment 
that they may be unable to serve the coverage area, which is described 
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B, on their post-transition channel 
due to differences in station parameters on the new channel or 
different equipment the station would like to use. These are changes 
that should be requested in an application to construct or modify post-
transition facilities on the new channel filed consistent with the 
procedures and standards for such applications adopted in the Third DTV 
Periodic Review proceeding, including compliance with the filing freeze 
and interference standard.
    52. Commenters notified the Commission of possible future changes 
to the parameters for 13 stations. See Comments of Pappas Entities, 
filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 4-5 (relating to station KSWT-DT, Yuma, AZ) and 
at 6 (relating to station KDBC-DT, El Paso, TX); Comments of Mission 
Broadcasting Inc. (``Mission''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 6-7 (relating 
to station KJTL-DT, Wichita Falls, TX) and at 10 (relating to WFXP-DT, 
Erie, PA); See Comments of Twin Cities, at 3 (relating to NCE station 
KTCI-DT, St. Paul, MN); Comments of The Arizona Board of Regents 
(``Arizona Board''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 1 (relating to NCE station 
KAET-DT, Phoenix, AZ); Comments of Barrington Peoria License LLC 
(``Barrington Peoria''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 1 (relating to NCE 
station WHOI-DT, Peoria, IL); Comments of the Board of Trustees of 
Northern Michigan University (``Northern Michigan''), filed Jan. 10, 
2007, at 2 (relating to NCE station WNMU-DT, Marquette, MI); Comments 
of Puerto Rico Public Broadcasting Corporation, filed Jan. 25, 2007 
(relating to station WIPR-DT, San Juan, PR); Comments of PTCB at 1 
(relating to station KPCB-DT, Snyder, TX, whose proposed post-
transition DTV Appendix B facilities accurately reflect the coverage of 
the KPCB certified construction permit); Comments of CBS Corporation 
(``CBS''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 4 (relating to station KCBS-DT, Los 
Angeles, CA); and Comments of Tribune Broadcasting Company 
(``Tribune''), filed Jan. 29, 2007, at 5 (relating to stations WGNO-DT 
and WNOL-DT, New Orleans, LA). In general, these commenters anticipate 
filing requests for changes to station parameters in the future, but do 
not yet have all of the information necessary to request changes at 
this time. See, e.g., Comments of Pappas Entities at 4-5 (stating 
intent to duplicate its analog facilities for KSWT-DT) and at 6 
(speculating possible need for new site for KDBC-DT); Comments of 
Mission at 6-7 and at 10 (stating future intent to modify KJTL-DT and 
WFXP-DT); and Comments of Tribune at 3 (stating intent to apply for 
different facilities not yet determined for WGNO-DT and WNOL-DT, both 
of which were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina). On July 23, 2007, 
Tribune filed an ex parte specifying the new parameters for these 
stations. See Tribune ex parte (dated July 23, 2007). In addition, in 
cases where a station certified to replication facilities or will not 
use its current DTV channel for post-transition operations, some 
stations comment that they may not be able to construct the precise 
facilities specified in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. For example, 
Pappas Entities, which certified to replication facilities for KSWT-DT, 
argues in its comments that it is virtually impossible for a VHF 
directional antenna to duplicate exactly the directional pattern 
originally designed for a UHF antenna. This issue was addressed in the 
Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM (72 FR 37310, July 9, 2007) (``Third DTV 
Periodic Review NPRM'') at ]] 92-93 (proposing post-transition 
application rules and procedures). In general, these stations note 
that, while the station seeks to serve the same coverage area on the 
post-transition channel as defined by the facilities specified in 
Appendix B, the station will operate with different equipment and/or 
other parameters on the channel than those specified in Appendix B. 
See, e.g., Comments of Twin Cities at 3 (stating intent to use

[[Page 54727]]

another station's existing antenna for KTCI-DT); Comments of Arizona 
Board at 1 (stating intent to use its analog channel's existing antenna 
for KAET-DT); Comments of Barrington Peoria at 1 (stating intent to use 
its analog channel's existing top-mounted antenna site for WHOI-DT); 
Comments of Northern Michigan at 2 (stating intent to use its analog 
channel's existing antenna site for WNMU-DT); Comments of PTCB at 1 
(stating intent to use its analog channel's parameters for KPCB-DT); 
and Comments of CBS at 4 (stating intent to use another station's 
parameters for KCBS-DT). We find that these speculative or incomplete 
requests are not yet ripe for Commission action. If and when these 
stations need to request changes to station parameters and have full 
information regarding the nature of the changes, the station should 
file a request following the procedures appropriate for the change 
requested.
    53. In response to these premature or speculative requests to 
modify facilities, we refer commenters to our discussion in the Third 
DTV Periodic Review NPRM concerning the rules and procedures for filing 
applications for construction permits to build stations' post-
transition (DTV) facilities and to request authorization to maximize 
facilities. We remind stations that they must file construction permit 
or modification applications (i.e., FCC Form 301 or 340) if they need 
to request authority to construct or modify their post-transition 
facilities. Moreover, in the Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM, the 
Commission proposed that stations must limit their applications to 
those facilities specified in the new DTV Table Appendix B and that 
applications requesting facilities that would serve a larger area than 
stations' new DTV Table Appendix B facilities would not be accepted. 
Stations that wish to apply for reduced facilities may do so, but must 
comply with the reduction standard ultimately adopted in the Third DTV 
Periodic Report and Order.
    54. The appropriate rules, procedures and timing for filing these 
applications will depend on whether the station will be using its 
current DTV channel or another channel for post-transition operations. 
Stations KSWT-DT, KDBC-DT, KJTL-DT and WFXP-DT will use their current 
DTV channel for post-transition operations. These stations, and others 
that seek to modify their facility on their current DTV channel, may 
file an application at any time, provided they comply with the relevant 
interference standard and do not violate the filing freeze. In response 
to Pappas Entities' request for clarification on this issue, we note 
that the filing freeze does not preclude the filing of an application 
to modify a construction permit to specify facilities listed for the 
station in the post-transition DTV Table Appendix B. Accordingly, 
Pappas can file for modification based on current rules and procedures 
and does not need a waiver of the freeze. However, to the extent that 
Pappas seeks a change in its post-transition DTV facilities that would 
result in an expanded or shifted coverage area, such a change would 
violate the filing freeze and Pappas must wait until the freeze is 
lifted to make such a request.
    55. Stations KTCI-DT, KAET-DT, WHOI-DT, WNMU-DT, KPCB-DT, WIPR-DT, 
and KCBS-DT will use a different channel from their current DTV channel 
for post-transition operations. These stations, and others that seek to 
use their analog channel or a new channel for post-transition 
operations, may not file an application to construct their post-
transition facilities until the final post-transition rules and 
procedures are established by the Report and Order in the Third DTV 
Periodic Review proceeding. We recognize that these stations may need 
to request different parameters from those specified in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B, even though these stations are not 
seeking to change the coverage area of their post-transition channel. 
These stations should address this situation in their applications for 
their post-transition channels. If a station that is moving to a 
different channel for post-transition use determines that the 
parameters necessary to serve the coverage area specified in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B differ from those specified in the 
post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, it should apply for those changes 
in its application. The Commission will evaluate those applications 
using the interference standard and other processing standards adopted 
in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order.
    56. We note that some commenters have asked for changes to the 
proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B facilities to conform to 
specific parts of their licensed or authorized facilities. Although we 
are allowing stations to change their certifications and post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B facilities to reflect an existing 
license or authorization, stations must conform to all portions of that 
license or authorization and may not choose various parts of that 
license or authorization.
    57. WGNO and WNOL, New Orleans, LA. Tribune Television New Orleans, 
Inc. (``Tribune''), licensee of station WGNO, channel 26, and permittee 
of WGNO-DT, channel 15, New Orleans, LA, received channel 26 for its 
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Tribune is also the licensee of station 
WNOL, channel 38, and permittee of WNOL-DT, channel 40, New Orleans, 
LA, which received channel 15 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. 
Tribune states that the analog and digital transmission facilities of 
both of these stations were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Tribune 
states that it has worked to resume and then improve reduced-power 
analog operations for both stations but that it has not yet been able 
to restore DTV operations. Tribune is evaluating alternative sites for 
the DTV operations of these stations and recently reported that it has 
finalized negotiations to relocate the digital operations of the 
stations to another tower. Tribune recently filed an ex parte to 
request that the proposed DTV allotments for WGNO and WNOL be changed 
to reflect the technical parameters for the facilities it will 
construct at the new site. The Commission is committed to continuing to 
work with stations affected by Hurricane Katrina to help those stations 
commence or re-commence operations. Because this request applies to 
post-transition operations, we will offer the proposal for further 
comment.

Proposals Subject to the Filing Freeze

    58. We deny the requests of stations seeking a waiver of the filing 
freeze, except for one station which has demonstrated unique 
circumstances. Seven stations filed comments requesting a change in 
and/or expansion of the facilities specified in the proposed post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B that is inconsistent with the August 
2004 filing freeze. This freeze on the filing of certain applications 
was imposed to provide for a stable database while the Commission 
developed the post-transition DTV Table. The freeze precludes any 
expansion of a station's post-transition noise limited service contour 
beyond that of the station's certified Grade B contour. The freeze 
remains in effect while the DTV Table is being finalized to assist the 
Commission in providing stations with authorizations for post-
transition facilities. The stations whose comments are discussed below 
are not requesting changes to DTV Table Appendix B to reflect 
authorized facilities to which they could have certified on FCC Form 
381, consistent with the 0.1 percent interference standard, or to match 
constructed and operating facilities. In contrast, the stations 
discussed below are requesting changes that violate the filing freeze 
and do not meet the criteria

[[Page 54728]]

for a change to certified facilities discussed in the Seventh Further 
Notice.
    59. For one station, WLAE, New Orleans, LA, we hereby waive the 
filing freeze and make the changes requested to the DTV Table Appendix 
B adopted herein. For the reasons discussed below, we believe that a 
waiver of the freeze for this station is warranted. For the other 
stations discussed below, we decline to waive the filing freeze and 
decline to make the requested changes to Appendix B. In order to 
preserve the integrity of the licensing process and avoid giving 
certain stations an unfair advantage over others in seeking expanded 
facilities, we have granted waivers of the filing freeze only in very 
limited circumstances. In general, before we can consider stations' 
requests to modify and, in particular, expand their DTV facilities, we 
must first ensure that all stations can at least provide digital 
service to their analog viewers by the transition date. Except for the 
unique circumstances present in the case of WLAE, we find that these 
stations have failed to demonstrate that a waiver of the freeze would 
advance their transition to DTV or that the station's circumstances 
warrant a waiver of the freeze for any other reason. A description of 
these stations' individual circumstances is provided below.
    60. WLAE, New Orleans, LA. Educational Broadcasting Foundation, 
Inc. (``EBFI''), licensee of NCE station WLAE, channel 32 and permittee 
of WLAE-DT, channel 31, New Orleans, LA, received channel 31 for its 
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. EBFI did not file a Form 381 for WLAE 
and, accordingly, the station received replication facilities in the 
proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B. At the time that 
certifications were due, WLAE-DT had a construction permit for 
maximized facilities. In August 2005, WLAE's facilities were destroyed 
by Hurricane Katrina. EBFI now asks to change the station's 
certification to its previously authorized maximized facilities.
    61. We will waive the freeze to allow WLAE-DT to apply for the 
maximized facilities specified in its initial construction permit. WLAE 
was one of the 41 stations expressly invited to request maximized 
facilities for which they would have been allowed to certify. As noted 
above, the WLAE-DT maximized facilities were authorized at the time 
that certifications were filed. Our actions herein will aid in the 
restoration of public television service to the city of New Orleans.
    62. WBPG, Gulf Shores, AL. LIN of Alabama, L.L.C. (``LIN''), 
singleton licensee of analog station WBPG, channel 55, Gulf Shores, AL, 
received channel 25 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. The previous 
licensee of WBPG certified on FCC Form 381 that the station did not 
have a digital allotment and would operate post-transition based on its 
currently authorized analog facilities. In comments filed to this 
proceeding, LIN seeks to maximize its Appendix B facilities for WBPG by 
increasing its ERP, changing its antenna pattern, and changing 
transmitter location. The changes requested would violate the filing 
freeze. LIN does not have an existing authorization for these 
facilities and does not meet the criteria for a change to certified 
facilities discussed in the Seventh Further Notice.
    63. WUOA, Tuscaloosa, AL. The Board of Trustees of the University 
of Alabama (``University of Alabama''), singleton licensee of analog 
station WUOA, channel 23, Tuscaloosa, AL, received channel 23 for its 
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. The previous licensee of WUOA, Channel 
23, LLC, certified in its FCC Form 381 that it did not have a DTV 
channel allotment and intended to operate its post-transition station 
based on its currently authorized analog license. In comments filed to 
this proceeding, the University of Alabama seeks to maximize the 
Appendix B facilities for WUOA by increasing the permitted ERP, 
changing the antenna pattern, and changing transmitter location. The 
facilities requested would violate the filing free