Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 and Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, 46885-46894 [2010-19294]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46885-46894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19294]



[[Page 46885]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[ET Docket No. 10-152; FCC 10-133]


Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 and 
Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document the Commission proposes to implement 
provisions of the ``Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 
2010''(STELA) that require the Commission, within 270 days after the 
date of its February 27, 2010 enactment, to ``develop and prescribe by 
rule a point-to-point predictive model for reliably and presumptively 
determining the ability of individual locations, through the use of an 
antenna, to receive signals in accordance with the signal intensity 
standard in Section 73.622(e)(1) of [our rules], or a successor 
regulation, including to account for the continuing operation of 
translator stations and low power television stations,'' and to issue 
an order completing its rulemaking to establish a procedure for on-site 
measurement of digital television signals in ET Docket No. 06-94. The 
Commission previously sought comment on a variety of issues related to 
establishment of a procedure for on-location measurements pursuant to 
the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 
(SHVERA), but has not yet adopted final rules specifying such a 
procedure.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before August 24, 2010, and reply 
comments must be filed on or before September 3, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Stillwell, Office of Engineering 
and Technology, (202) 418-2925, e-mail: Alan.Stillwell@fcc.gov, TTY 
(202) 418-2989.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by ET Docket No. 10-152, 
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.
     E-mail: [Optional: Include the E-mail address only if you 
plan to accept comments from the general public]. Include the docket 
number(s) in the subject line of the message.
     Mail: [Optional: Include the mailing address for paper, 
disk or CD-ROM submissions needed/requested by your Bureau or Office. 
Do not include the Office of the Secretary's mailing address here.]
     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 of this document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 10-152, FCC 10-33, adopted July 
28, 2010, and released July 28, 2010. The full text of this document is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: https://www.fcc.gov. 
Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 
CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking 
Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
     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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
      All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings 
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 
445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 
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.
    People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).

Summary of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. The Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 
(STELA) reauthorizes the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and 
Reauthorization Act of 2004 (SHVERA) by extending the effectiveness and 
amending certain provisions in the Communications Act and the Copyright 
Act. These provisions govern the delivery of distant network-affiliated 
broadcast television station signals by satellite providers. To 
implement the new statutory regime, the STELA, inter alia, requires the 
Commission, within 270 days after the date of its February 27, 2010 
enactment, to (1) ``develop and prescribe by rule a point-to-point 
predictive model for reliably and presumptively determining the ability 
of individual locations, through the use of an antenna, to receive 
signals in accordance with the signal intensity standard in Sec.  
73.622(e)(1) of [the Commission's rules], or a successor regulation, 
including to account for the continuing operation of translator 
stations and low power television stations,'' and (2) issue an order 
completing its rulemaking to establish a procedure for on-site 
measurement of digital television signals in ET Docket No. 06-94.
    2. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) portion of this 
action, the Commission proposes to prescribe a point-to-point 
predictive model for determining the ability of individual locations to 
receive an over-the-air digital television broadcast signal at the 
intensity level needed for service

[[Page 46886]]

through the use of an antenna, as required by the STELA. Our goal in 
proposing this model is to provide a means for reliably and 
presumptively determining whether the over-the-air signals of 
television stations, including low power stations, can be received at 
individual locations for purposes of establishing the eligibility of 
individual households to receive the signals of distant television 
broadcast network stations from their satellite carriers. The 
Commission believes that the proposed predictive model, which is based 
on the current model for predicting the intensity of analog television 
signals at individual locations, will allow such determinations to be 
made in a timely and cost effective manner for all parties involved, 
including network TV stations, satellite carriers and satellite 
subscribers.
    3. In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), the 
Commission seeks information to update the record in ET Docket No. 06-
94, based on which it intends to prescribe rules for determining 
eligibility of satellite subscribers for receiving distant network 
signals from their satellite TV provider using on-location testing/
measurements. The Commission previously sought comment on a variety of 
issues related to establishment of a procedure for on-location 
measurements pursuant to the SHVERA, but has not yet adopted final 
rules specifying such a procedure. In the STELA, Congress modified some 
of the testing requirements set forth in the SHVERA. The Commission is 
now addressing these modifications to both refresh the record and 
obtain additional information and comment on STELA requirements that 
differ from the SHVERA requirements.

Predictive Model--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    4. As recognized and directed by Congress in the STELA, a 
predictive model is needed to provide presumptive determinations as to 
whether a household is unserved by local network-affiliated digital 
full service and digital low power TV and digital TV translator 
stations. The STELA revises the definition of ``unserved household'' in 
three potentially significant ways: (1) The network stations whose 
signals are to be considered are now limited to those network 
affiliates in the same DMA as the subscriber; (2) the definition of 
``unserved household'' now references an ``antenna'' without specifying 
what kind of antenna or where it is located; and (3) the definition 
specifically recognizes both a ``primary stream'' and a ``multicast 
stream'' affiliated with a network. The Commission believes the 
existing model for predicting the availability of analog TV signals, 
known as the Satellite Home Viewing Improvement Act Individual Location 
Longley-Rice model (SHVIA ILLR model), can be readily modified to 
predict digital TV signal strengths at individual locations under the 
new STELA regime and thereby provide presumptive determinations of 
eligibility for delivery of distant digital signals by satellite 
carriers in the same manner as it currently provides for analog 
signals. Use of this model with appropriate modifications for digital 
signals would also comply with the intent of Congress in the STELA that 
we rely on the ILLR model as previously revised for analog signals and 
the Commission's recommendation in its 2005 Report to Congress for use 
in making determinations of eligibility for satellite delivery of 
distant network signals. The SHVIA ILLR model has proven over time to 
be an accurate and reliable predictor of analog TV signal strength and 
has been well accepted by both the broadcast and DBS industries. 
Through use of this model, consumers, broadcast television stations and 
satellite television carriers have avoided the need to conduct an 
actual measurement test every time a satellite customer believes that 
he or she is unable to receive an adequate signal off-the-air from a 
local television network-affiliated station. The Commission expects the 
revised model to provide these same benefits in the digital television 
environment. The Commission will discuss its proposal for the digital 
signal predictive model in the following paragraphs.
    5. The Commission notes that, with the anticipated launch of local-
into-local service in all 210 DMAs by Dish Network, the circumstances 
in which a subscriber would need, or be eligible for, distant signals 
will be significantly reduced. It therefore anticipates that the 
predictive model will be used far less frequently than in previous 
years.
    6. Digital TV ILLR Model Proposal. The Commission proposes to 
modify the SHVIA ILLR model to make it capable of reliably and 
accurately predicting the field strength of digital television stations 
and to establish the modified version in its rules as the point-to-
point model for determining the ability of individual locations to 
receive with an antenna the digital television signals of full service 
television stations, digital low power television stations (including 
digital Class A stations), and digital TV translator stations. 
Specifically, the Commission proposes to adopt the Individual Location 
Longley-Rice model set forth in CS Docket No. 98-201 as revised for 
analog signals in the SHVIA proceeding, i.e., the SHVIA ILLR model, 
with appropriate modifications, as the method for prediction of digital 
television signal strengths. Consistent with the STELA, the Commission 
is also proposing to use the DTV noise-limited service contour values 
in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) as the standard for determining whether a 
predicted field strength is sufficient for reception of a signal at an 
individual location. This ``digital TV ILLR model'' and standard will 
be specified as the required method for making presumptive 
determinations of an individual household's eligibility for satellite 
retransmission of the distant network signals. The Commission requests 
comment on the proposals for a digital TV ILLR model as set forth 
herein.
    7. The prediction model proposed addresses the statutory change in 
the definition of an unserved household from an ``outdoor antenna'' to 
an ``antenna'' and takes into account terrain, morphology (buildings 
and similar man-made land uses), and other land cover variations, some 
of which were recognized in our development of the SHVIA ILLR model but 
still are yet to be evaluated and accepted by the scientific and 
technical community. Inasmuch as the digital signals of digital low 
power TV (including digital Class A) and digital TV translator stations 
use the same transmission standard as full service stations, the 
Commission believes that the same model will be capable of serving to 
provide predictions of the signal strengths of all types of digital TV 
stations. That is, the Commission tentatively concludes that the same 
digital TV model will provide predictions that are equally reliable and 
accurate for full service, low power and TV translator digital signals. 
The Commission therefore proposes to use the new digital TV ILLR model 
for prediction of the signal strengths of all three of these types of 
digital TV stations. It also believes that this model will account for 
multicast as well as primary streams that are transmitted by a station 
and affiliated with one or more networks. The Commission requests 
comment on this proposal and its tentative conclusion. The Commission 
also proposes to establish a procedure through which parameters used in 
the digital TV ILLR model can be adjusted based on new information that 
may become available and other refinements. This process will provide 
for continued refinement of the model on the basis of reliable 
technical information, as it becomes available.

[[Page 46887]]

    8. The analog SHVIA ILLR model that will serve as the basis for our 
digital TV ILLR model is similar to the service coverage predictive 
model that the Commission established for evaluating television 
coverage and interference prediction, as set forth in its Office of 
Engineering and Technology's (OET) OET Bulletin No. 69. However, 
whereas the Longley-Rice model for coverage and interference prediction 
provides estimates of aggregate service availability (including losses 
due to interference), the SHVIA ILLR model provides estimates only of 
field strength at individual locations (and it does not include 
consideration of interference). The SHVIA ILLR model does not replace 
the current Commission rules for field strength contours in Sec.  
73.683 or for prediction of coverage for non-satellite distant signal 
eligibility purposes in Sec.  73.684. In fact, the SHVIA ILLR model 
could identify unserved households lying within a station's former 
Grade B contour and, likewise, identify served households outside that 
contour.
    9. The SHVIA ILLR model incorporates features to account for the 
radio propagation environment and the receiving system conventionally 
assumed to be used by viewers to achieve service with an antenna. Given 
that digital and analog television signals are transmitted in the same 
frequency bands, the factors affecting propagation of signals using the 
two different modulation methods and the background noise level are the 
same. The Commission does not believe that it needs to modify any of 
the features of the SHVIA ILLR model that describe propagation and the 
background noise levels and is not proposing to modify those elements 
of the model. The Commission also observed that the ``planning 
factors'' that describe a set of assumptions for the television 
reception system are different in some important respects for analog 
and digital signals. However, with the exception of antenna location 
and performance and certain other factors relating to propagation that 
are discussed in the following paragraphs, the Commission does not 
believe that it needs to consider those differences for purposes of the 
proposed digital TV ILLR model because they are incorporated into the 
threshold signal level for reception for service, which the STELA 
directs to be set at the noise-limited levels specified in Sec.  
73.622(e)(1).
    10. The Commission also does not see any need for changing the 
model to reflect the added reference to network affiliated multicast 
streams. The prediction for a television broadcast signal applies 
regardless of the content. If a household is predicted to receive a 
station, then all of that station's broadcast streams would be 
received. Therefore, the Commission proposes to make no special 
adjustment in the model to implement this change in the definition of 
unserved households. The Commission requests comment on these aspects 
of the proposed digital TV ILLR model.
    11. The aspects of the SHVIA ILLR model that are different for 
digital and analog signals and that the Commission needs to modify or 
consider modifying in the new point-to-point predictive model for 
digital signals include antenna location (outdoor vs. indoor) and 
performance, time and location variability factors, and land use and 
land cover. The Commission discusses its proposals for changes to the 
SHVIA ILLR model to address these aspects of the new digital TV ILLR 
model for prediction of DTV signal strengths and its proposal for a 
procedure for the continued refinement of the model as new information 
may become available in the following sections. The proposed amendments 
to the Commission's rules to implement the new digital TV ILLR model 
are set forth in Appendix A in the NPRM, and the proposed digital TV 
ILLR model will be described in a new OET Bulletin No. 73, a draft of 
which is attached as Appendix B in the NPRM and NOI.
    12. The Commission proposes to uphold any previous findings of 
eligibility for delivery of distant signals based on the digital TV 
ILLR predictive model, in the event that it updates that model at some 
point in the future and a prediction from the updated model indicates 
that the location can receive service from a local network station. The 
Commission believes that ``grandfathering'' the eligibility of 
households in such cases would be appropriate to avoid disruption of 
the existing services to which households have been accustomed.
    13. Antenna Location and Performance. The Commission believes that 
the current standard for an outdoor antenna as specified in the DTV 
planning factors in OET Bulletin No. 69 should be used in predicting 
digital television signal strengths at individual locations. As 
indicated above, the STELA revises the definition of an unserved 
household by changing the reference to the antenna used to receive 
service from a ``conventional, stationary outdoor rooftop antenna'' to 
an ``antenna.'' The reception model (planning factors) for digital 
television service assumes that a viewer uses an outdoor antenna with a 
certain level of gain mounted at 10 meters (33 feet) above ground 
(roof-top level). Those antenna location and performance parameters are 
reflected in the field strength values defining the analog Grade B and 
digital noise-limited contours in Sec. Sec.  73.683(a) and 
73.622(e)(1), respectively. The STELA mandates use of the digital 
television signal strength standard in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) or a 
successor regulation. Thus, we believe that STELA's specification of 
the signal strength intensity standard incorporated into our rules 
implies use of an outdoor antenna to receive service.
    14. However, the Commission believes that Congress's use of the 
term ``antenna'' in the STELA grants the Commission greater flexibility 
to take into account different types of antennas than was previously 
available. In addition, Congress and representatives of the direct 
broadcast satellite industry have previously raised concerns as to 
whether the Commission should consider certain issues relating to the 
location and performance of actual antennas consumers use to receive 
DTV signals. In the SHVERA, Congress directed the Commission to 
investigate whether the noise-limited DTV service standard should be 
revised to take into account the types of antennas that are available 
to consumers. The Commission concluded in the 2005 Report to Congress 
that the existing DTV planning factor assumptions for antenna gain, 
orientation, and placement were appropriate and should not be altered. 
It also specifically concluded that the digital television signal 
strength standards in the Commission's rules should not be modified to 
account for the fact that an antenna can be mounted on a roof or placed 
within a home and can be fixed or capable of rotating. In this regard, 
it concluded that it would be impractical to attempt to account for 
indoor reception conditions in the DTV planning factors and also stated 
that it would be impracticable to establish a regime whereby households 
with indoor antennas are subject to different signal strength standards 
than those with outdoor antennas. It noted that difficulty would arise 
in setting and applying standards for situations in which a household 
could not use an outdoor antenna.
    15. In view of the Commission's findings in the 2005 Report to 
Congress and the relevance of those findings to the digital signal 
intensity standard that Congress specified in the STELA, the Commission 
believes that the current standard for an outdoor antenna as specified 
in the DTV planning factors should be used in predicting digital 
television signal strengths at individual locations. The Commission 
therefore

[[Page 46888]]

proposes to include that outdoor antenna standard (with some 
adjustments for height consistent with the analog ILLR model) in the 
new digital TV ILLR model that will be used in making distant signal 
eligibility determinations under the STELA. The Commission also 
believes that it would be appropriate to use the receive antenna gain 
and front-to-back ratios specified in the planning factors for the 
performance capabilities of the outdoor receive antenna used in making 
predictions, as those values are consistent with the DTV noise-limited 
service contour standard in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) and outdoor antennas 
performing at (or better) than those values are readily available. The 
Commission requests comment on these proposals, including whether it 
should adopt gain and front-to-back specifications for the receive 
antenna that are different from those set forth in the planning 
factors.
    16. Using the outdoor model may result in instances where a 
consumer who either cannot use an outdoor antenna or cannot receive or 
cannot receive service using an outdoor antenna and is not able to 
receive a station's service with an indoor antenna will be found 
ineligible for satellite delivery of a distant network signal. The 
Commission remains concerned about such instances, and therefore is 
again inviting comment and suggestions and new information that would 
provide a solution for those satellite television subscribers who 
either are not able to use an outdoor antenna or cannot receive service 
using an outdoor antenna and cannot receive service with an indoor 
antenna. In this regard, the Commission is particularly interested in 
new ideas and information that have been developed in the time since 
the 2005 Report to Congress. For commenters who advocate including an 
indoor antenna in the model, the Commission requests detailed technical 
information regarding the specific standards to be used for all aspects 
of the transmission path including antenna characteristics, building 
penetration loss, multipath effects, etc. In addition, such commenters 
should provide detailed information regarding how those parameters 
should be applied within a standard model given the variety of 
situations that could arise, and how to develop a model that would also 
be valid for consumers with outdoor antennas. The Commission seeks 
comment on how to develop a model that could vary depending on whether 
the subscriber lives in a multiple dwelling unit or a single family 
home, or whether the household is in an urban area or in a rural area. 
Further, the Commission seeks comment on how to ensure that such a 
flexible model would not be abused by specification of incorrect 
parameters describing the location for which a prediction is to be 
made.
    17. Time and Location Variability Factors. Consistent with its 
findings in the 2005 Report to Congress, the Commission proposes to 
modify the time variability factor of the SHVIA ILLR model to 90% as 
used in the DTV planning factors and to continue to use 50% as the 
location variability in the digital TV ILLR model. The Commission 
requests comment on these proposals. Parties commenting on this issue 
who believe that alternative specifications for the time and location 
variability factors should be used are requested to provide new 
information, data and analyses that were not available at the time of 
the Inquiry to support their positions.
    18. The field strength of television signals, like that of other 
radiofrequency signals, varies with time and location. That is, 
television signal strengths vary over time at the same location and 
also vary from location to location, often very short distances apart, 
when observed at the same time. These variations of field strength with 
time and location are incorporated into the television planning models. 
For analog TV, the SHVIA ILLR model defines service using the F(50,50) 
field strength curves in Sec.  73.699 of the Commission's rules. The 
Commission notes that DTV service differs in that it is based on use of 
F(50,90) field strength curves, as derived from the F(50,50) and 
F(50,10) field strength curves in Sec.  73.699 of our rules, to define 
a DTV station's noise-limited contour. The F(50,90) service contour 
means at least 50% of the locations can be expected to receive a signal 
that exceeds the field strength value at least 90% of the time. The 
Commission also notes that the field strength standard for analog 
reception (the Grade B contour value) incorporates an adjustment to 
raise the F(50,50) values to F(50,90).
    19. In the Inquiry that provided information used in the 2005 
Report to Congress, the Commission did not find EchoStar's and H&E's 
position on changing the time variability factor values for DTV 
persuasive. In this regard, it noted that radiofrequency signal 
propagation is always statistical in nature and that the power and/or 
antenna height needed to approach 100% reliability increases in a non-
linear manner. The Commission also observed that the current values 
were established based on an industry-Government consensus that relied 
on the traditional TV service model that worked well for analog TV 
service and that, as argued by the broadcasters, changing the time 
variability factor values to 99% reliability would greatly shrink local 
DTV service areas. It further observed, as pointed out by Meintel, 
Sgrignoli and Wallace, consulting engineers, that the assumed 10% 
reduction in service availability occurs at the outermost limit of a 
station's service area and is not the typical figure for time 
reliability across a station's entire service area. As the distance to 
a station's transmitter decreases, time availability increases. The 
Commission stated that households at the edge of a station's service 
area could also improve their reception (and thereby reduce or 
eliminate periods when the station's signal is not available) by 
mounting their antennas higher, using higher gain antennas, or using 
low-noise pre-amplifiers at their antennas. No commenter suggested 
changing the location variability factor and the Commission stated that 
it knew of no considerations that would lead it to recommend changing 
from the current median value for this factor. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether there should be any changes to this factor in the 
context of digital signals, which are subject to the so-called cliff 
effect that results in full loss of service if the signal falls below a 
small amount below the service threshold.
    20. Land Use and Land Cover Factors. The land use and land cover 
(``LULC'') data provides information on building structures and other 
man-made terrestrial features and on other land cover variations such 
as forests and open land that can affect radio propagation. Inclusion 
of this data in the prediction methodology of the SHVIA ILLR TV 
computer model significantly enhanced the accuracy and reliability of 
its signal strength predictions. The method for considering these land 
cover factors is to assign certain signal loss values, in addition to 
those already implicit in the model, as a function of the LULC category 
of the reception point. More specifically, the field strength predicted 
by the basic Longley-Rice model is reduced by the clutter loss value 
associated with the respective LULC category for the location. 
Reception point environments at individual locations are classified in 
terms of the codes used in the LULC database of the United States 
Geological Survey (USGS).
    21. The Commission proposes to continue to apply the LULC 
categories and clutter loss values for describing land use and land 
cover features in the

[[Page 46889]]

digital TV ILLR model in the same manner as currently incorporated into 
the SHVIA ILLR model. These values were specified in the SHVIA First 
Report and Order. We recognize that these parameters were the subject 
of differing views in the inquiry we conducted in preparing the 2005 
Report to Congress. Therein, it was concluded that the clutter loss 
values used in the current SHVIA ILLR model strike the correct balance, 
noting that this has been borne out by the data on the model's 
performance, which shows that using the values adopted by the 
Commission for the SHVIA ILLR model produce approximately an equal 
number of over-predictions as under-predictions. Thus, we have found a 
range of values, including zero, that correspond to different land 
cover types are valid. We also observe that the Commission further 
indicated that it believed that for any digital model that may be 
developed, the values currently in use for the analog model would 
similarly yield accurate results. The Commission requests comment on 
the appropriate clutter loss values for predicting digital television 
field strengths. It is particularly interested in new information and 
data that may have been developed since 2005. In this regard, the 
Commission also requests comment and information regarding any of the 
additional LULC categories and data that, at the time of our 
development of the SHVIA ILLR model, were yet to be evaluated and 
accepted by the scientific and technical community and have since 
become accepted by that community.
    22. Analog Low Power TV and TV Translator Stations. With respect to 
the continued operation of analog Low-Power Television (LPTV), Class A, 
and TV Translator stations that retransmit in analog format the content 
of local digital network-affiliated television stations, the Commission 
tentatively concludes that the existing predictive methods specified in 
FCC OET Bulletin No. 72 should continue to apply. The STELA requires 
the Commission ``* * * to account for the continuing operation of 
translator stations and low power television stations.'' Although all 
full-service television stations were converted fully to digital 
operation by June 12, 2009, LPTV, Class A, and TV Translator stations 
were not required to convert and most of those stations continue to 
broadcast in analog format. For those stations, the Commission believes 
that there is no reason to change the SHVIA ILLR model that has been in 
use for several years, and so proposes to continue to specify the 
procedure described in OET-72 for determining the eligibility of 
viewers with respect to those analog stations.
    23. Procedure for Continued Refinement of the Digital TV ILLR 
Model. As indicated, the STELA requires that the Commission establish 
procedures for continued refinement in the application of the digital 
TV ILLR model through use of additional data as it becomes available. 
The Commission believes the most efficient, effective, fair, 
transparent and timely approach for revising the digital TV ILLR model 
if new information becomes available is to hold open the docket in this 
proceeding and conduct further rule making to consider possible changes 
to OET Bulletin No. 73 (which will describe the model and be referenced 
in our rules) to implement improvements to the model. This proposal is 
consistent with the Commission's past action concerning the SHVIA 
model. Given that the digital TV ILLR model will be incorporated into 
its rules, the Commission believes that this proposal also is 
consistent with the requirements of Section 553 of the Administrative 
Procedures Act. Under this proposal, parties with new data, analysis or 
other information relating to improving the predictive model could 
submit requests to modify the model under the instant docket. OET would 
evaluate such requests and prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for 
consideration by the Commission. The Commission also could initiate 
rulemaking action on its own motion. The Commission invites comment on 
this proposal to use its standard notice and comment rulemaking 
procedure for updating the digital TV ILLR model and its applications 
and also asks for suggestions for modifications and alternative plans.
    24. Stations to Consider for Distant Signals. The Commission does 
not propose to modify the proposed digital TV ILLR model to address the 
STELA provision that a subscriber is eligible for delivery of distant 
network signals only if he or she is unserved by stations located in 
the same DMA. Under the SHVIA and the SHVERA, the predicted signal 
strengths of all the stations affiliated with the same network were 
considered, regardless of those stations' DMAs. That is, if a satellite 
subscriber wanted to receive the distant signal of the XYZ network, 
then the predicted results from any XYZ network affiliated stations 
would be analyzed for that subscriber's location and if one or more of 
those affiliated stations were predicted to deliver a signal of the 
requisite intensity, the subscriber would be predicted ``served'' by 
that network and not eligible for a distant signal from that network 
unless each of the stations predicted to serve the subscriber granted a 
waiver. The STELA changes this regime by specifying that only ``local'' 
stations are to be considered, i.e., stations that are located in the 
same DMA as the satellite subscriber instead of examining any station 
of the same network regardless of DMA.
    25. Rather than modify the proposed digital TV ILLR model itself to 
address this change, the Commission proposes to change the way the 
model's results are to be used. That is, instead of considering any 
network station that the model predicts to be available in the 
determination of a subscriber's eligibility for a distant signal, we 
propose to require satellite carriers to consider only the signals of 
network stations located in the subscriber's DMA. The Commission seeks 
comment on this proposal. It notes that this statutory change to 
consideration of only local network affiliated stations will reduce the 
number of stations that need to be considered when determining 
eligibility for distant network signals and thereby also reduce the 
burden associated with waiver requests by reducing the number of 
stations from which a waiver would have to be requested. As noted, this 
statutory change will also reduce the testing burden. The Commission 
also seeks comment on any other methodological or other changes it 
should consider to minimize consumer burdens.

On-Site Signal Measurement--Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    26. The STELA, similar to the SHVERA, provides that if the ILLR 
model predicts that a satellite subscriber receives a local network 
station of sufficient field strength, the subscriber may request an on-
site signal strength test to determine definitively whether a local 
signal can be received at his/her location at the specified signal 
intensity and directs the Commission to complete its rulemaking 
proceeding in ET Docket No. 06-94 on establishment of a measurement 
procedure. The measurement procedure is to be used to determine whether 
the signal of a network-affiliated station is of sufficient intensity 
(field strength) to be received at the subscriber's location, i.e., 
meets or exceeds the standard in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) of the Commission's 
rules. Essentially, the measurement procedure provides an option for 
obtaining an empirical, rather than predictive, determination of the 
signal strength available at a location. The results of measurements 
would be considered more accurate than the results of the predictive 
model in all

[[Page 46890]]

cases. Because the measurement procedure and predictive model are both 
intended to determine the same issue, the underlying service model and 
planning factors on which each is based need to be consistent (and the 
Commission's proposals for the predictive model herein and for the 
measurement procedure in the SHVERA NPRM use the same service model/
planning factors).
    27. The STELA raises three issues regarding the measurement 
procedure not addressed in the SHVERA NPRM: (1) The stations whose 
signals are to be measured; (2) the antenna to use in performing on-
location testing; and (3) the program stream from a station in the 
market to be measured. Generally, the commenting parties in ET Docket 
No, 06-94 agreed with our proposals to largely base the measurement 
procedures for digital television signals on those already in use for 
measuring analog signals with specific modifications to account for the 
differences between analog and digital television signals. The 
Commission seeks comment on any new developments or changed positions 
in order to update the record. To the extent that commenters' positions 
remain the same, they need not submit additional or repetitive comments 
reiterating information and positions that were previously filed.
    28 . Stations to be Tested. As indicated, the STELA differs from 
the SHVIA and SHVERA in that it specifies that only ``local'' stations, 
i.e., stations located within the same DMA as the subscriber's 
household, are to be considered in determining a subscriber's 
eligibility. This change similarly affects the measurement procedures. 
Previously, a testing entity had to measure the signals of all stations 
affiliated with a specific network. However, under the STELA, a testing 
entity is to consider only the signals of those network-affiliated 
stations that are located in the same DMA as the satellite subscriber. 
The Commission proposes to modify its proposed rules for measurement of 
DTV signals for purposes of determining eligibility for delivery of 
distant network signals by satellite providers to incorporate this 
change. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. As noted, the 
statutory change could reduce burdens on both testers and consumers as 
fewer stations would need to be tested, which should result in lower 
costs for consumers and consume less time. Consistent with the STELA's 
direction that it seek ways to minimize consumer burdens associated 
with on-location testing, the Commission requests comment and 
suggestions regarding steps it could take to further minimize the 
burden of on-location testing on consumers.
    29. Indoor Measurements. The Commission proposes to adopt the same 
approach with regard to measurement of digital television signal 
strengths as it proposed with regard to the digital TV ILLR model: to 
limit measurement to outdoor antennas. The discussion in the SHVERA 
NPRM only addressed outdoor signal measurements, as the SHVERA 
specified use of an outdoor antenna. In view of the discussed change in 
the STELA from the term ``conventional, stationary, outdoor rooftop 
receiving antenna'' to the term ``antenna,'' we are revisiting the 
issue of the antenna to be used in testing. The principal alternative 
to a conventional, stationary outdoor antenna that is currently used by 
consumers is a moveable indoor antenna. As noted in the NPRM 
discussion, in the 2005 Report to Congress the Commission concluded 
that many factors make it impractical to develop a simple, reliable and 
accurate model of indoor television reception. Those same factors, 
including the performance expected of an indoor antenna, the placement 
of the antenna, and the location within a structure or room where the 
antenna is located make it difficult to develop an indoor television 
signal measurement procedure. First, because of the variability of 
indoor reception conditions across different structures and in 
different rooms and locations within the same structure, there is no 
standard model and planning factors for indoor reception, and in 
particular there is no standard antenna specification for such 
reception. The wide variation in indoor viewing situations makes it 
difficult to specify a standard model that meaningfully relates to any 
typical indoor viewing location. In addition, the performance of indoor 
antennas available to consumers varies significantly. Second, signal 
strengths typically vary significantly at different locations within a 
room and so there is the question of where to place the antenna--should 
it be in the center of the room, next to a wall or a window, or at the 
location of the television? What if the consumer changes the location 
of the television in the future? Also, there are questions regarding 
antenna height. Should the testing antenna be placed one or two meters 
or some other distance above the floor?
    30. In addition to the practical difficulties of specifying a 
standard model for indoor reception, as discussed, the signal intensity 
standard in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) assumes an outdoor antenna. For these 
reasons, the Commission proposes not to specify a procedure for indoor 
measurement of DTV signal strengths. It is, however, requesting 
comments and suggestions for alternative approaches for making 
eligibility determinations for situations where consumers are not able 
to use an outdoor antenna to receive local television signals. Such 
approaches could include options for measurement of signals indoors. 
Commenters advocating development of a procedure for indoor measurement 
of DTV signals should provide detailed technical information on all 
aspects of such procedures, including a standard indoor antenna and 
specific measurement procedures that address the considerations 
indicated above. Such parties are also requested to specify proposals 
for indoor measurement that would be suitable for adoption into our 
rules.
    31. Multicast signals. The Commission tentatively concludes not to 
adopt special testing procedures to measure network signals that are 
transmitted on multicast streams, rather than on a primary stream. The 
testing protocol measures a station's signal at the subscriber 
location. Whether the station's signal includes one or more program 
streams or networks, there is no change needed in the test employed 
because the presence of multiple streams has no bearing on the signal 
intensity or receivability. The Commission believes the tester, the 
satellite carrier and the network affiliate involved in the conduct of 
the test will be able to identify the network affiliates in the 
broadcast signal. If the signal is found to be available at the 
subscriber location at the requisite intensity, then any and all of the 
networks in that signal will likewise be available. If the station's 
signal is not found to be present at the requisite intensity, the 
subscriber will be unserved with respect to the networks broadcast on 
the streams in that signal, unless the subscriber receives a signal of 
sufficient strength from another local station affiliated with the same 
network or networks. The Commission seeks comment on this tentative 
conclusion.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    32. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),\1\ 
requires that an initial regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared 
for notice and comment

[[Page 46891]]

rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that ``the rule 
will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.'' \2\ The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' \3\ In addition, the term ``small business'' has the 
same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small 
Business Act.\4\ A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is 
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the 
Small Business Administration (SBA).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 
Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \2\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    \3\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \4\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small business concern'' in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 
632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a 
small business applies ``unless an agency, after consultation with 
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and 
after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more 
definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of 
the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal 
Register.''
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    33. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to amend its rules to 
prescribe a point-to-point predictive model for reliably and 
presumptively determining the ability of individual locations, through 
use of an antenna, to receive signals in accordance with the signal 
intensity standard in Sec.  73.622(e)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 
CFR 73.622(e)(1), or a successor regulation, including the ability to 
account for the continuing operation of low power television and TV 
translator stations.
    34. Television station licensees, Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) 
operators, and other Direct to Home (DTH) Satellite operators may use 
the proposed technique to establish the eligibility or non-eligibility 
of individual households for satellite delivery of distant television 
programming. These determinations will usually be made at the point of 
sale of satellite receiving equipment for homes and will tend to 
increase the number of eligible customers. The changes proposed are of 
a technical, scientific nature, without a substantial economic impact. 
In addition, the primary economic impact of these proposals will be 
their indirect effect on individual consumers.
    35. Therefore, we certify that the proposals in this Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, if adopted, will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. If commenters believe 
that the proposals discussed in the Notice require additional RFA 
analysis, they should include a discussion of these issues in their 
comments and additionally label them as RFA comments. The Commission 
will send a copy of the Notice, including a copy of this initial 
certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    36. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA),\7\ the Commission has prepared this present Further 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules 
proposed in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. (FNPRM). Written 
public comments are requested on this Further IRFA. Comments must be 
identified as responses to the Further IRFA and must be filed by the 
deadlines specified on the first page of this NPRM and FNPRM. The 
Commission will send a copy of this NPRM and FNPRM, including this 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, (SBREFA) Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \8\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rules. In the NPRM 
portion of this action, we seek comment on proposals for establishing a 
predictive model for determining the signal strength of digital 
television signals, including low power TV stations (Class A, LPTV and 
TV translator stations), at individual locations and for using that 
model to determine eligibility for delivery of distant network-
affiliated television broadcast signals by direct broadcast satellite 
services. In addition, we seek comment on our proposal to continue to 
use the current standard for an outdoor antenna as specified in the DTV 
planning factors in predicting digital television signal strengths at 
individual. In the FNPRM discussion, we seek comment on two additional 
proposals relating to our proposed procedure for measurement of the 
strength of digital television signals at individual locations in ET 
Docket No 06-94. First, consistent with the new STELA provisions for 
eligibility, we propose to specify that a testing entity is to consider 
and test only the signals of those network affiliated stations that are 
located in the same DMA as the satellite subscriber. Second, we propose 
to specify the use of an outdoor antenna in measuring digital 
television signal strengths and, consistent with the change in the 
STELA to specifying an ``antenna'' rather than an ``outdoor antenna,'' 
we also will consider comments and suggestions for solutions for 
situations where consumers are not able to use an outdoor antenna to 
receive local television signals. We indicate that such solutions could 
include options for measurement of signals indoors. This NPRM and FNPRM 
begins the process of implementing requirements of the Satellite 
Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (STELA).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010, 
Title V of the ``American Workers, State, and Business Relief Act of 
2010,'' Public Law 111-175, 124 Stat. 1218 (2010) relating to 
copyright licensing and carriage of broadcast signals by satellite 
carriers, codified in scattered sections of 17 and 47 U.S.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. Legal Basis: The legal basis for the rule changes proposed in 
the NPRM and FNPRM is contained in Sections 1, 4(i) and (j), and 339 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and 
(j), and 339 (including amendments enacted in the Satellite Television 
Extension and Localism Act of 2010).
    C. Description and Estimates of the Number of Small Entities to 
Which the Rules Adopted in this Notice may apply. The RFA directs 
agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate 
of the number of small entities that will be affected by the proposed 
rules.\10\ The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as 
having the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small 
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' \11\ In 
addition, the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term 
``small business concern'' under the Small Business Act.\12\ A small 
business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; 
(2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any 
additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration 
(SBA).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3), 604(a)(3).
    \11\ Id., 601(6).
    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small business concern'' in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 
632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a 
small business applies ``unless an agency, after consultation with 
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and 
after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more 
definitions of such terms which are appropriate to the activities of 
the agency and publishes such definitions(s) in the Federal 
Register.''
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rules contained in the Further NPRM seek comment on 
and

[[Page 46892]]

modify previous proposals to measure the strength of digital television 
signals at any particular location, as a means of determining whether 
any particular household is ``unserved'' by a local DTV network station 
and is therefore eligible to receive a distant DTV network signal 
retransmitted by a Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service provider. 
Therefore, DBS providers will be directly and primarily affected by the 
proposed rules, if adopted. In addition, the proposed rules, if 
adopted, will also directly affect those local digital television 
stations that broadcast network programming. Therefore, in this Further 
IRFA, we consider, and invite comment on, the impact of the proposed 
rules on small digital television broadcast stations, small DBS 
providers, and other small entities. A description of such small 
entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such small entities, 
is provided in the following paragraphs.
    Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 29.6 million small 
businesses, according to the SBA.\14\ A ``small organization'' is 
generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned 
and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' \15\ Nationwide, as of 
2002, there were approximately 1.6 million small organizations.\16\ The 
term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is defined generally as 
``governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, 
or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' 
\17\ Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate that there were 87,525 local 
governmental jurisdictions in the United States.\18\ We estimate that, 
of this total, 84,377 entities were ``small governmental 
jurisdictions.'' \19\ Thus, we estimate that most governmental 
jurisdictions are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See SBA, Office of Advocacy, ``Frequently Asked 
Questions,'' https://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqindex.cfm?areaID=24 (revised 
Sept. 2009).
    \15\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \16\ Independent Sector, The New Nonprofit Almanac & Desk 
Reference (2002).
    \17\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \18\ U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United 
States: 2006, Section 8, page 272, Table 415.
    \19\ We assume that the villages, school districts, and special 
districts are small, and total 48,558. See U.S. Census Bureau, 
Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2006, section 8, page 
273, Table 417. For 2002, Census Bureau data indicate that the total 
number of county, municipal, and township governments nationwide was 
38,967, of which 35,819 were small. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cable Television Distribution Services. The ``Cable and Other 
Program Distribution'' census category includes cable systems 
operators, closed circuit television services, direct broadcast 
satellite services, multipoint distribution systems, satellite master 
antenna systems, and subscription television services. Since 2007, 
these services have been defined within the broad economic census 
category of Wired Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined 
as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged 
in operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and 
infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of 
voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired telecommunications 
networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology 
or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use 
the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to 
provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, 
including VoIP services; wired (cable) audio and video programming 
distribution; and wired broadband Internet services. By exception, 
establishments providing satellite television distribution services 
using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in 
this industry.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category, which is: All such firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees. To gauge small business prevalence for these cable services 
the Commission must, however, use current census data that are based on 
the previous category of Cable and Other Program Distribution and its 
associated size standard; that size standard was: All such firms having 
$13.5 million or less in annual receipts. According to Census Bureau 
data for 2002, there were a total of 1,191 firms in this previous 
category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,087 firms 
had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 43 firms had receipts of 
$10 million or more but less than $25 million. Thus, the majority of 
these firms can be considered small.
    Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) Service. DBS service is a 
nationally distributed subscription service that delivers video and 
audio programming via satellite to a small parabolic ``dish'' antenna 
at the subscriber's location. Because DBS provides subscription 
services, DBS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. However, as discussed above, the 
Commission relies on the previous size standard, Cable and Other 
Subscription Programming, which provides that a small entity is one 
with $13.5 million or less in annual receipts. Currently, only two 
operators--DirecTV and EchoStar Communications Corporation (EchoStar)--
hold licenses to provide DBS service, which requires a great investment 
of capital for operation. Both currently offer subscription services 
and report annual revenues that are in excess of the threshold for a 
small business. Because DBS service requires significant capital, the 
Commission believes it is unlikely that a small entity as defined by 
the SBA would have the financial wherewithal to become a DBS licensee. 
Nevertheless, given the absence of specific data on this point, the 
Commission acknowledges the possibility that there are entrants in this 
field that may not yet have generated $13.5 million in annual receipts, 
and therefore may be categorized as a small business, if independently 
owned and operated.
    Television Broadcasting. The proposed rules and policies apply to 
television broadcast licensees and potential licensees of television 
service. The SBA defines a television broadcast station as a small 
business if such station has no more than $14 million in annual 
receipts.\20\ Business concerns included in this industry are those 
``primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with sound.'' \21\ 
The Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial 
television stations to be 1,392.\22\ According to Commission staff 
review of the BIA/Kelsey, MAPro Television Database (``BIA'') as of 
April 7, 2010, about 1,015 of an estimated 1,380 commercial television 
stations \23\ (or about 74 percent) have revenues of $14 million or 
less and thus qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. The 
Commission has estimated the number of licensed non-commercial 
educational

[[Page 46893]]

(NCE) television stations to be 390.\24\ We note, however, that, in 
assessing whether a business concern qualifies as small under the above 
definition, business (control) affiliations \25\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 515120.
    \21\ Id. This category description continues, ``These 
establishments operate television broadcasting studios and 
facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the 
public. These establishments also produce or transmit visual 
programming to affiliated broadcast television stations, which in 
turn broadcast the programs to the public on a predetermined 
schedule. Programming may originate in their own studios, from an 
affiliated network, or from external sources.'' Separate census 
categories pertain to businesses primarily engaged in producing 
programming. See Motion Picture and Video Production, NAICS code 
512110; Motion Picture and Video Distribution, NAICS Code 512120; 
Teleproduction and Other Post-Production Services, NAICS Code 
512191; and Other Motion Picture and Video Industries, NAICS Code 
512199.
    \22\ See News Release, ``Broadcast Station Totals as of December 
31, 2009,'' 2010 WL 676084 (FCC) (dated Feb. 26, 2010) (``Broadcast 
Station Totals''); also available at https://www.fcc.gov/mb/.
    \23\ We recognize that this total differs slightly from that 
contained in Broadcast Station Totals, supra note 446; however, we 
are using BIA's estimate for purposes of this revenue comparison.
    \24\ See Broadcast Station Totals, supra note 239.
    \25\ ``[Business concerns] are affiliates of each other when one 
concern controls or has the power to control the other or a third 
party or parties controls or has the power to control both.'' 13 CFR 
121.103(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 t