Closed Captioning of Internet Protocol-Delivered Video Programming: Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, 39691-39698 [2013-15722]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules Dated: June 26, 2013. John Howard, Administrator, World Trade Center, Health Program and Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services. [FR Doc. 2013–15816 Filed 7–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150–28–C FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 79 [MB Docket No. 11–154; FCC 13–84] Closed Captioning of Internet ProtocolDelivered Video Programming: Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on the potential imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements for covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were raised by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which adopted rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the owners, providers, and distributors of IP-delivered video programming and rules governing the closed captioning capabilities of certain apparatus on which consumers view video programming. SUMMARY: Comments are due on or before September 3, 2013; reply comments are due on or before September 30, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 11–154, 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:// fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: 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. • People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 39691 accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 418–0432. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Sokolow, Diana.Sokolow@fcc.gov, or Maria Mullarkey, Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, of the Policy Division, Media Bureau, (202) 418– 2120. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission’s Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 13–84, adopted on June 13, 2013 and released on June 14, 2013. 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., Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, 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. Alternative formats are available for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), by sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or calling the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 (TTY). 202 and 203 of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (‘‘CVAA’’) by adopting rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the owners, providers, and distributors of video programming delivered via Internet protocol (‘‘IP’’) and rules governing the closed captioning capabilities of certain apparatus on which consumers view video programming. Specifically, in response to the Petition for Reconsideration of Consumer Groups, we issue an FNPRM to obtain further information necessary to determine whether the Commission should impose synchronization requirements on device manufacturers. Such synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data included with the video programming the apparatus receives. Separately, in response to issues raised by the Petition for Reconsideration of the Consumer Electronics Association, the FNPRM seeks comment on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of the statute. 2. Our goal in this proceeding remains to implement Congress’s intent to better enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to view video programming. In considering the requests made in the three petitions for reconsideration received, we have evaluated the effect on consumers who are deaf or hard of hearing as well as the cost of compliance to affected entities. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis This document does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified ‘‘information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). II. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 3. Apparatus synchronization requirements. We invite comment on whether the Commission should require apparatus manufacturers to ensure that their apparatus synchronize the appearance of closed captions with the display of the corresponding video. In the Report and Order, the Commission concluded that it would be inappropriate to impose synchronization requirements on apparatus. Rather, the Commission stated ‘‘that ensuring that timing data is properly encoded and maintained through the captioning interchange and delivery system is an obligation of [s]ection 202 [video programming distributors and providers], and not of device manufacturers.’’ Consumer Groups argue that the Commission should impose timing obligations on device manufacturers pursuant to section 203 of the CVAA because apparatus may cause captions to become out of synch with the corresponding video. We need more information in the Summary of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking I. Introduction 1. In the FNPRM, we seek further comment on the potential imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements for covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were raised by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which implemented portions of sections PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 39692 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS record to address this issue because commenters disagree as to whether synchronization problems can be caused by apparatus.1 Commenters also disagree as to whether existing standards would enable manufacturers to address caption synchronization.2 Another issue is whether video programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited than manufacturers to ensure captioning quality, including captioning synchronization. Based on the record information on synchronization in response to the Consumer Groups Petition, it now appears that apparatus may play a role in synchronization problems. We do not, however, currently possess sufficient information to determine the nature or extent to which apparatus are the cause of these problems, or whether there is a workable manner in which to impose synchronization requirements on apparatus. Accordingly, we invite comment on this issue. 4. Specifically, we seek information on whether apparatus may cause closed captioning synchronization problems, and if so, how. We encourage commenters to provide specific evidence on this issue, including for example a discussion of situations in which the same video programming is displayed in the same manner (i.e., on the same Web site or via the same application) on different apparatus, where one apparatus displays the closed captioning with better synchronization than the other. Are video programming owners, providers, and distributors better suited than manufacturers to ensure caption quality, including synchronization? If so, why? What are the costs and benefits of imposing caption synchronization requirements on video programming owners, providers, and distributors in lieu of imposing such requirements on apparatus manufacturers? 5. To the extent that apparatus cause closed captioning synchronization problems, we seek comment on what 1 Consumer Groups argue that synchronization problems can be caused by apparatus, and thus failure to place synchronization obligations on apparatus may make timing requirements on video programming distributors ineffective. To the contrary, Mitsubishi Electric Visual Solutions America, Inc. (‘‘MEVSA’’) argues that it is unaware of any caption display synchronization problems caused by receivers, and CEA argues that decoders do not cause synchronization problems. 2 CEA and MEVSA argue that existing standards would not enable manufacturers to comply with a synchronization requirement. Consumer Groups disagree, arguing that mainstream captioning standards such as CEA–608, CEA–708, and the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (‘‘SMPTE’’) Timed Text Format (‘‘SMPTE–TT’’) support synchronization. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 requirements we should impose on apparatus to address this problem. Are there existing standards that would enable manufacturers to address closed caption synchronization, or is it possible for manufacturers to develop and implement such standards? If not, by what means could apparatus comply with a synchronization requirement? Do closed captioning standards provide the necessary timing data for compliance with and enforcement of a synchronization standard? If we impose a synchronization requirement on apparatus, should we require apparatus to render closed captions consistent with the data dictating the timing of captions that is included with the video programming the apparatus receives? What are the costs and benefits of imposing caption synchronization requirements on apparatus manufacturers? What compliance deadline should we impose on any apparatus synchronization requirements that we adopt? In an enforcement proceeding, how could the Commission determine whether synchronization problems are caused by the apparatus or by the video programming owner, provider, or distributor? 6. Closed captioning requirements on DVD and Blu-ray players. As explained in the Order on Reconsideration, adopted with the FNPRM and published elsewhere in this publication, we provide manufacturers of DVD players that do not render or pass through closed captions, and manufacturers of Blu-ray players, with a temporary extension of the compliance deadline, pending resolution of this FNPRM. The CVAA and our rules require that apparatus ‘‘be equipped with built-in closed caption decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closedcaptioned video programming.’’ Thus, we invite comment on the closed captioning requirements that we should impose on DVD players that do not render or pass through closed captions, and on Blu-ray players with regard to Blu-ray discs and DVDs.3 Commenters should provide information on the costs and benefits of imposing such requirements, including the technical aspects of what would be required to make closed captioning accessible on such devices. 7. We seek comment on whether we should permit DVD players that do not currently render or pass through closed captions to include an analog output to pass through closed captions. As 3 We understand that many, if not all, Blu-ray players are ‘‘backward compatible’’ with DVDs, that is, they are able to play both Blu-ray discs and DVDs. We seek comment on this understanding. PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 explained in the Order on Reconsideration, the record demonstrates that the DVD player market is declining. Accordingly, how would such a regulation on DVD players impact the market? In the context of low-cost DVD players, would there be sufficient consumer demand for manufacturers to continue manufacturing such players if faced with the costs of rendering or adding an analog output? Given that Blu-ray players are able to play both Blu-ray discs and DVDs, should we consider Blu-ray players that do not render closed captions but include an analog output to pass through closed captions on DVDs to comply with the closed captioning requirements of the CVAA? Is there a consumer expectation that captioned DVDs should be viewable on a backward compatible Blu-ray player? Should Blu-ray players that include an analog output that pass through captions be granted a waiver of the Commission’s interconnection mechanism rule (as we have granted in the Order on Reconsideration in the DVD context)? Alternatively, should we require Blu-ray players to render captions from DVDs? We seek specific comment on the costs and benefits of the approaches considered herein as well as on the technical aspects of what would be required to effectuate these requirements. For example, would manufacturers be required to implement a software or hardware upgrade? Similarly, what are the costs and benefits of requiring all DVD and Bluray players to include an analog output, and what technical steps are necessary to achieve this? In addition, what would be an appropriate deadline for compliance with the closed captioning requirements for DVD players that do not render or pass through captions and for Blu-ray players? 8. With regard to Blu-ray players playing Blu-ray discs, as we noted above, there is not currently an industry-wide standard for closed captioning on Blu-ray discs. Thus, Bluray discs do not currently contain captions. Does this fact make it more important that Blu-ray player manufacturers take steps to ensure that captions from DVDs can be rendered or passed through? Should we require Bluray players to render or pass through captions from Blu-ray discs within a certain period of time with the expectation that doing so would spur the industry to prioritize developing a standard for discs and include captions on Blu-ray discs? Alternatively, given that Blu-ray discs as well as DVDs E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules currently include subtitles,4 we seek comment on whether, as a legal matter, rendering or passing through subtitles could satisfy section 303(u)’s requirement that the Blu-ray players and DVD players ‘‘be equipped with built-in closed caption decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closedcaptioned video programming.’’ Could the rendering or passing through subtitles be considered an ‘‘alternate means’’ of compliance with our rules? 5 Or, should subtitles or SDH only be considered an alternative means of compliance to the extent that they can be made compatible with the technical capabilities set forth in our apparatus closed captioning rules (for example, the ability to change text font and size)? We seek specific comment on what steps the industry, including content providers, must take to provide this type of ‘‘enhanced’’ subtitles or SDH. For example, what technical steps can manufacturers take in this regard? III. Procedural Matters A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 9. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘RFA’’),6 the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) concerning 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 IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the first page of the item. The Commission will send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’).7 In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.8 4 Subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing (‘‘SDH’’) do not provide all of the features available with closed captions. 5 See Public Law 111–260, section 203(e) (‘‘An entity may meet the requirements of sections 303(u), 303(z), and 330(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 through alternate means than those prescribed by regulations pursuant to subsection (d) if the requirements of those sections are met, as determined by the Commission.’’). In the Report and Order, the Commission recognized that SDH does not offer the same user control features as closed captioning. 6 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). 7 See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). 8 See id. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rule Changes 10. In the FNPRM, we seek further comment on the potential imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements for covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were raised by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which implemented portions of sections 202 and 203 of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (‘‘CVAA’’) by adopting rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the owners, providers, and distributors of video programming delivered via Internet protocol (‘‘IP’’) and rules governing the closed captioning capabilities of certain apparatus on which consumers view video programming. Specifically, in response to the Petition for Reconsideration of Consumer Groups, we issue an FNPRM to obtain further information necessary to determine whether the Commission should impose synchronization requirements on device manufacturers. Such synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data included with the video programming the apparatus receives. Separately, in response to issues raised by the Petition for Reconsideration of the Consumer Electronics Association, the FNPRM seeks comment on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of the statute. 11. Our goal in this proceeding remains to implement Congress’s intent to better enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to view video programming. In considering the requests made in the three petitions for reconsideration received, we have evaluated the effect on consumers who are deaf or hard of hearing as well as the cost of compliance to affected entities. 2. Legal Basis 12. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111– 260, 124 Stat. 2751, and the authority found in sections 4(i), 4(j), 303, 330(b), 713, and 716 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 303, 330(b), 613, and 617. PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 39693 3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposals Will Apply 13. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.9 The RFA generally defines the term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 10 In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ under the Small Business Act.11 A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.12 Below, we provide a description of such small entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such small entities, where feasible. 14. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards. First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.5 million small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ‘‘small organization’’ is generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.’’ Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small organizations. Finally, 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.’’ Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that there were 89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may 95 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). U.S.C. 601(6). 11 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 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 U.S.C. 601(3). 12 15 U.S.C. 632. Application of the statutory criteria of dominance in its field of operation and independence are sometimes difficult to apply in the context of broadcast television. Accordingly, the Commission’s statistical account of television stations may be over-inclusive. 10 5 E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 39694 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules qualify as ‘‘small governmental jurisdictions.’’ Thus, we estimate that most governmental jurisdictions are small. 15. Cable Television Distribution 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.’’ The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 1,906 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,906, 1,880 had fewer than 1000 employees, and 26 firms had more than 1000 employees. Thus under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small. 16. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has also developed its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable company’’ is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers nationwide. Industry data indicate that all but ten cable operators nationwide are small under this size standard. In addition, under the Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small system’’ is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. Industry data indicate that, of 6,101 systems nationwide, 4,410 systems have under 10,000 subscribers, and an additional 258 systems have 10,000–19,999 subscribers. Thus, under this standard, most cable systems are small. 17. Cable System Operators. The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is ‘‘a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.’’ The Commission has determined that an operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Industry data indicate that all but nine VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 cable operators nationwide are small under this subscriber size standard. We note that the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore we are unable to estimate more accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as small under this size standard. 18. 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. DBS, by exception, is now included in the SBA’s broad economic census category, ‘‘Wired Telecommunications Carriers,’’ which was developed for small wireline firms. Under this category, the SBA deems a wireline business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small. Currently, only two entities provide DBS service, which requires a great investment of capital for operation: DIRECTV and EchoStar Communications Corporation (‘‘EchoStar’’) (marketed as the DISH Network). Each currently offers subscription services. DIRECTV and EchoStar each report annual revenues that are in excess of the threshold for a small business. Because DBS service requires significant capital, we believe it is unlikely that a small entity as defined by the SBA would have the financial wherewithal to become a DBS service provider. 19. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. Two economic census categories address the satellite industry. The first category has a small business size standard of $15 million or less in average annual receipts, under SBA rules. The second has a size standard of $25 million or less in annual receipts. 20. The category of ‘‘Satellite Telecommunications’’ ‘‘comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications services to other establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.’’ Census Bureau data for 2007 show that 607 Satellite Telecommunications establishments PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 operated for that entire year. Of this total, 533 establishments had annual receipts of under $10 million or less, and 74 establishments had receipts of $10 million or more. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by our action. 21. The second category, i.e., ‘‘All Other Telecommunications,’’ comprises ‘‘establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Establishments providing Internet services or voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications connections are also included in this industry.’’ For this category, Census Bureau data for 2007 shows that there were a total of 2,623 establishments that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,478 establishments had annual receipts of under $10 million and 145 establishments had annual receipts of $10 million or more. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of All Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by our action. 22. Television Broadcasting. This Economic Census category ‘‘comprises establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with sound. These establishments operate television broadcasting studios and facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the public.’’ The SBA has created the following small business size standard for Television Broadcasting firms: Those having $14 million or less in annual receipts. The Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial television stations to be 1,387. In addition, according to Commission staff review of the BIA Advisory Services, LLC’s Media Access Pro Television Database on March 28, 2012, about 950 of an estimated 1,300 commercial television stations (or approximately 73 percent) had revenues of $14 million or less. We therefore estimate that the majority of commercial television broadcasters are small entities. 23. We note, however, that in assessing whether a business concern qualifies as small under the above definition, business (control) affiliations E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 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. In addition, an element of the definition of ‘‘small business’’ is that the entity not be dominant in its field of operation. We are unable at this time to define or quantify the criteria that would establish whether a specific television station is dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses to which rules may apply does not exclude any television station from the definition of a small business on this basis and is therefore possibly over-inclusive to that extent. 24. In addition, the Commission has estimated the number of licensed noncommercial educational (NCE) television stations to be 396. These stations are non-profit, and therefore considered to be small entities. 25. Open Video Systems. The open video system (‘‘OVS’’) framework was established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily recognized options for the provision of video programming services by local exchange carriers. The OVS framework provides opportunities for the distribution of video programming other than through cable systems. Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within the SBA small business size standard covering cable services, which is ‘‘Wired Telecommunications Carriers.’’ The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small. In addition, we note that the Commission has certified some OVS operators, with some now providing service. Broadband service providers (‘‘BSPs’’) are currently the only significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises. The Commission does not have financial or employment information regarding the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be operational. Thus, at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as small entities. 26. Cable and Other Subscription Programming. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ‘‘This industry comprises establishments VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 primarily engaged in operating studios and facilities for the broadcasting of programs on a subscription or fee basis. These establishments produce programming in their own facilities or acquire programming from external sources. The programming material is usually delivered to a third party, such as cable systems or direct-to-home satellite systems, for transmission to viewers.’’ The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having $15 million dollars or less in annual revenues. To gauge small business prevalence in the Cable and Other Subscription Programming industries, the Commission relies on data currently available from the U.S. Census for the year 2007. Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there were 659 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of that number, 462 operated with annual revenues of $9,999,999 million dollars or less, and 197 operated with annual revenues of 10 million or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 27. Motion Picture and Video Production. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ‘‘This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in producing, or producing and distributing motion pictures, videos, television programs, or television commercials.’’ We note that firms in this category may be engaged in various industries, including cable programming. Specific figures are not available regarding how many of these firms produce and/or distribute programming for cable television. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having $29.5 million dollars or less in annual revenues. To gauge small business prevalence in the Motion Picture and Video Production industries, the Commission relies on data currently available from the U.S. Census for the year 2007. Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there were 9,095 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 8,995 had annual receipts of $24,999,999 or less, and 100 had annual receipts ranging from not less than $25,000,000 to $100,000,000 or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 28. Motion Picture and Video Distribution. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ‘‘This industry comprises establishments primarily PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 39695 engaged in acquiring distribution rights and distributing film and video productions to motion picture theaters, television networks and stations, and exhibitors.’’ We note that firms in this category may be engaged in various industries, including cable programming. Specific figures are not available regarding how many of these firms produce and/or distribute programming for cable television. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having $29.5 million dollars or less in annual revenues. To gauge small business prevalence in the Motion Picture and Video Distribution industries, the Commission relies on data currently available from the U.S. Census for the year 2007. Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there were 450 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 434 had annual receipts of $24,999,999 or less, and 16 had annual receipts ranging from not less than $25,000,000 to $100,000,000 or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 29. Small Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this present RFA analysis. A ‘‘small business’’ under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and ‘‘is not dominant in its field of operation.’’ The SBA’s Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not ‘‘national’’ in scope. We have therefore included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts. 30. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (‘‘LECs’’). Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category ‘‘Wired Telecommunications Carriers.’’ Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 39696 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small. 31. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), ‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and ‘‘Other Local Service Providers.’’ Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category ‘‘Wired Telecommunications Carriers.’’ Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small. Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange service, competitive access providers, ‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and ‘‘Other Local Service Providers’’ are small entities. 32. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ‘‘This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment.’’ The SBA has developed a small business size standard for ‘‘Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing,’’ which is: all such firms having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were 919 establishments that operated for part or all of the entire year. Of those 919 establishments, 771 operated with 99 or fewer employees, and 148 operated with 100 or more employees. Thus, under that size standard, the majority of establishments can be considered small. 33. Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing. The SBA has classified the manufacturing of audio and video equipment under in NAICS Codes classification scheme as an industry in VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 which a manufacturer is small if it has less than 750 employees. Data contained in the 2007 Economic Census indicate that 491 establishments in this category operated for part or all of the entire year. Of those 491 establishments, 456 operated with 99 or fewer employees, and 35 operated with 100 or more employees. Thus, under the applicable size standard, a majority of manufacturers of audio and video equipment may be considered small. 34. Internet Publishing and Broadcasting and Web Search Portals. The Census Bureau defines this category to include ‘‘. . . establishments primarily engaged in 1) publishing and/ or broadcasting content on the Internet exclusively or 2) operating Web sites that use a search engine to generate and maintain extensive databases of Internet addresses and content in an easily searchable format (and known as Web search portals). The publishing and broadcasting establishments in this industry do not provide traditional (non-Internet) versions of the content that they publish or broadcast. They provide textual, audio, and/or video content of general or specific interest on the Internet exclusively. Establishments known as Web search portals often provide additional Internet services, such as email, connections to other Web sites, auctions, news, and other limited content, and serve as a home base for Internet users.’’ 35. In this category, the SBA has deemed an Internet publisher or Internet broadcaster or the provider of a web search portal on the Internet to be small if it has fewer than 500 employees. For this category of manufacturers, Census data for 2007, which supersede similar data from the 2002 Census, show that there were 2,705 such firms that operated that year. Of those 2,705 firms, 2,682 (approximately 99%) had fewer than 500 employees and, thus, would be deemed small under the applicable SBA size standard. Accordingly, the majority of establishments in this category can be considered small under that standard. 36. Closed Captioning Services. These entities would be indirectly affected by our proposed action. The SBA has developed two small business size standards that may be used for closed captioning services. The two size standards track the economic census categories, ‘‘Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services’’ and ‘‘Court Reporting and Stenotype Services.’’ 37. The first category of Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services ‘‘comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized motion picture or video postproduction services, such as PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 editing, film/tape transfers, subtitling, credits, closed captioning, and animation and special effects.’’ The relevant size standard for small businesses in these services is an annual revenue of less than $29.5 million. For this category, Census Bureau Data for 2007 indicate that there were 1,605 firms that operated in this category for the entire year. Of that number, 1,597 had receipts totaling less than $29,500,000. Consequently we estimate that the majority of Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services firms are small entities that might be affected by our proposed actions. 38. The second category of Court Reporting and Stenotype Services ‘‘comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing verbatim reporting and stenotype recording of live legal proceedings and transcribing subsequent recorded materials.’’ The size standard for small businesses in these services is an annual revenue of less than $7 million. For this category, Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there were 2,706 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,590 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and 19 firms had receipts of $5 million to $9,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of Court Reporting and Stenotype Services firms are small entities that might be affected by our proposed action. 4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities 39. The FNPRM invites comment on whether the Commission should impose closed captioning synchronization requirements on apparatus. Such synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data included with the video programming the apparatus receives. The FNPRM invites comment on the extent to which apparatus are the cause of synchronization problems, and on the means by which manufacturers could address closed caption synchronization. The FNPRM also asks whether video programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited than manufacturers to ensure caption quality, including synchronization, and it asks about the costs and benefits of imposing caption synchronization requirements on apparatus manufacturers. Separately, the FNPRM seeks comment on what closed captioning requirements we should impose on manufacturers of DVD players that do not render or pass through closed captions, and on manufacturers of Blu-ray players with E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS regard to Blu-ray players playing Bluray discs and playing DVDs, including specific questions about the rendering or pass through of closed captions. The FNPRM also seeks comment on the costs and benefits of imposing such requirements. Information received in response to the FNPRM will enable the Commission to consider the costs that would be incurred by affected entities, including smaller entities. 5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered 40. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.13 41. We note that, pursuant to rules and policies previously adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission may grant exemptions to the IP closed captioning rules adopted pursuant to section 202 of the CVAA where a petitioner has shown that compliance would present an economic burden (i.e., a significant difficulty or expense), and may grant exemptions to the apparatus rules adopted pursuant to section 203 of the CVAA where a petitioner has shown that compliance is not achievable (i.e., cannot be accomplished with reasonable effort or expense) or is not technically feasible. This exemption process enables the Commission to address the impact of the rules on individual entities, including smaller entities, and to modify the application of the rules to accommodate individual circumstances. Further, a video programming provider’s or owner’s de minimis failure to comply with the IP closed captioning rules shall not be treated as a violation, and parties may use alternate means of compliance to the rules adopted pursuant to either section 202 or section 203 of the CVAA. Individual entities, including smaller entities, may benefit from these provisions. 42. Regarding the specific issue of synchronization requirements as discussed in the FNPRM, the 13 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)–(c)(4). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Commission seeks comment on whether video programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited than manufacturers to ensure caption quality, including synchronization. The Commission also seeks comment on what requirements it should impose on apparatus, to the extent that apparatus cause closed captioning synchronization problems. Accordingly, the Commission seeks to allocate responsibilities appropriately. 43. Regarding the specific issue of DVD players that do not render or pass through closed captions and Blu-ray players as discussed in the FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on the costs and benefits of imposing closed captioning requirements, including the technical aspects of what would be required to make closed captioning accessible on such devices. Accordingly, the Commission seeks to balance the costs and benefits appropriately in crafting a final rule. 6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules 44. None. B. Paperwork Reduction Act 45. The FNPRM does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the PRA, Public Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified ‘‘information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). C. Ex Parte Rules 46. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance with the Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter’s PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 39697 written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule § 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by § 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules. D. Filing Requirements 47. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to §§ 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 the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). 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/. • Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy 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 messengerdelivered 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 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1 39698 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 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. 48. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex parte submissions will be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., CY– A257, Washington, DC, 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. 49. People with Disabilities. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the FCC’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 (TTY). E. Additional Information 50. For additional information on this proceeding, contact Diana Sokolow, Diana.Sokolow@fcc.gov, or Maria Mullarkey, Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418–2120. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 79 Cable television operators, Communications equipment, Multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs), Satellite television service providers, Television broadcasters. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Proposed Rules For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 79 as follows: PART 79—CLOSED CAPTIONING AND VIDEO DESCRIPTION OF VIDEO PROGRAMMING 1. The authority citation for Part 79 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 303, 307, 309, 310, 330, 544a, 613, 617. 2. Amend § 79.103 to add paragraph (c)(12) to read as follows: ■ § 79.103 Closed caption decoder requirements for all apparatus. * * * * * (c) * * * (12) Synchronization. All apparatus that render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data included with the video programming the apparatus receives. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2013–15722 Filed 7–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS IV. Ordering Clauses DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 51. Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Public Law 111–260, 124 Stat. 2751, and the authority found in sections 4(i), 4(j), 303, 330(b), 713, and 716 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 303, 330(b), 613, and 617, this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted, effective thirty (30) days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. 52. It is further ordered that the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MB Docket No. 11–154, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Fish and Wildlife Service VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Jul 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2013–0028; 4500030113] RIN 1018–AZ38 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designating Critical Habitat for Three Plant Species on Hawaii Island Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the reopening of the public comment period on our October 17, 2012, proposed designation of critical habitat for three plant species (Bidens micrantha ssp. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ctenophylla (kookoolau), Isodendrion pyrifolium (wahine noho kua), and Mezoneuron kavaiense (uhiuhi)) on Hawaii Island under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In response to requests we received, we are reopening the comment period to allow all interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed designation of critical habitat and the draft economic analysis. Comments previously submitted on the proposed rule or draft economic analysis need not be resubmitted as they will be fully considered in our determinations on this rulemaking action. We also announce a public information meeting on our proposed rule and associated documents. DATES: Written Comments: We will consider all comments received or postmarked on or before September 3, 2013. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. Public Information Meeting: We will hold a public information meeting in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, on Wednesday, August 7, 2013, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. (see ADDRESSES section, below). ADDRESSES: Document availability: You may obtain copies of the proposed rule on the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2012–0070, or by mail from the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Written Comments: You may submit written comments by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2013–0028. (2) By hard copy: Submit comments by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R1– ES–2013–0028; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. Public Information Meeting: The public information meeting will be held in the Council Chambers of the West Hawaii Civic Center located at 74–5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, KailuaKona, HI 96740 (telephone 808–323– 4444). We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on https:// www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information). E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM 02JYP1

Agencies

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39691-39698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15722]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 79

[MB Docket No. 11-154; FCC 13-84]

Closed Captioning of Internet Protocol-Delivered Video
Programming: Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications
and Video Accessibility Act of 2010

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on the
potential imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements
for covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill
the closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were
raised by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which
adopted rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the
owners, providers, and distributors of IP-delivered video programming
and rules governing the closed captioning capabilities of certain
apparatus on which consumers view video programming.

DATES: Comments are due on or before September 3, 2013; reply comments
are due on or before September 30, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 11-154,
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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: 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.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: (202) 418-
0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Sokolow, Diana.Sokolow@fcc.gov,
or Maria Mullarkey, Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, of the Policy Division,
Media Bureau, (202) 418-2120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 13-84, adopted on June 13,
2013 and released on June 14, 2013. 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., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document
will also be available via ECFS at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word,
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. Alternative formats are available for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), by
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or calling the Commission's Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-
0432 (TTY).

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

This document does not contain proposed information collection(s)
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified
``information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief
Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

Summary of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

1. In the FNPRM, we seek further comment on the potential
imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements for
covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the
closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were raised
by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which
implemented portions of sections 202 and 203 of the Twenty-First
Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (``CVAA'')
by adopting rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the
owners, providers, and distributors of video programming delivered via
Internet protocol (``IP'') and rules governing the closed captioning
capabilities of certain apparatus on which consumers view video
programming. Specifically, in response to the Petition for
Reconsideration of Consumer Groups, we issue an FNPRM to obtain further
information necessary to determine whether the Commission should impose
synchronization requirements on device manufacturers. Such
synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that
render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data
included with the video programming the apparatus receives. Separately,
in response to issues raised by the Petition for Reconsideration of the
Consumer Electronics Association, the FNPRM seeks comment on how DVD
and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of
the statute.
2. Our goal in this proceeding remains to implement Congress's
intent to better enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to
view video programming. In considering the requests made in the three
petitions for reconsideration received, we have evaluated the effect on
consumers who are deaf or hard of hearing as well as the cost of
compliance to affected entities.

II. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

3. Apparatus synchronization requirements. We invite comment on
whether the Commission should require apparatus manufacturers to ensure
that their apparatus synchronize the appearance of closed captions with
the display of the corresponding video. In the Report and Order, the
Commission concluded that it would be inappropriate to impose
synchronization requirements on apparatus. Rather, the Commission
stated ``that ensuring that timing data is properly encoded and
maintained through the captioning interchange and delivery system is an
obligation of [s]ection 202 [video programming distributors and
providers], and not of device manufacturers.'' Consumer Groups argue
that the Commission should impose timing obligations on device
manufacturers pursuant to section 203 of the CVAA because apparatus may
cause captions to become out of synch with the corresponding video. We
need more information in the

[[Page 39692]]

record to address this issue because commenters disagree as to whether
synchronization problems can be caused by apparatus.\1\ Commenters also
disagree as to whether existing standards would enable manufacturers to
address caption synchronization.\2\ Another issue is whether video
programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited than
manufacturers to ensure captioning quality, including captioning
synchronization. Based on the record information on synchronization in
response to the Consumer Groups Petition, it now appears that apparatus
may play a role in synchronization problems. We do not, however,
currently possess sufficient information to determine the nature or
extent to which apparatus are the cause of these problems, or whether
there is a workable manner in which to impose synchronization
requirements on apparatus. Accordingly, we invite comment on this
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Consumer Groups argue that synchronization problems can be
caused by apparatus, and thus failure to place synchronization
obligations on apparatus may make timing requirements on video
programming distributors ineffective. To the contrary, Mitsubishi
Electric Visual Solutions America, Inc. (``MEVSA'') argues that it
is unaware of any caption display synchronization problems caused by
receivers, and CEA argues that decoders do not cause synchronization
problems.
\2\ CEA and MEVSA argue that existing standards would not enable
manufacturers to comply with a synchronization requirement. Consumer
Groups disagree, arguing that mainstream captioning standards such
as CEA-608, CEA-708, and the Society of Motion Picture and
Television Engineers (``SMPTE'') Timed Text Format (``SMPTE-TT'')
support synchronization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Specifically, we seek information on whether apparatus may cause
closed captioning synchronization problems, and if so, how. We
encourage commenters to provide specific evidence on this issue,
including for example a discussion of situations in which the same
video programming is displayed in the same manner (i.e., on the same
Web site or via the same application) on different apparatus, where one
apparatus displays the closed captioning with better synchronization
than the other. Are video programming owners, providers, and
distributors better suited than manufacturers to ensure caption
quality, including synchronization? If so, why? What are the costs and
benefits of imposing caption synchronization requirements on video
programming owners, providers, and distributors in lieu of imposing
such requirements on apparatus manufacturers?
5. To the extent that apparatus cause closed captioning
synchronization problems, we seek comment on what requirements we
should impose on apparatus to address this problem. Are there existing
standards that would enable manufacturers to address closed caption
synchronization, or is it possible for manufacturers to develop and
implement such standards? If not, by what means could apparatus comply
with a synchronization requirement? Do closed captioning standards
provide the necessary timing data for compliance with and enforcement
of a synchronization standard? If we impose a synchronization
requirement on apparatus, should we require apparatus to render closed
captions consistent with the data dictating the timing of captions that
is included with the video programming the apparatus receives? What are
the costs and benefits of imposing caption synchronization requirements
on apparatus manufacturers? What compliance deadline should we impose
on any apparatus synchronization requirements that we adopt? In an
enforcement proceeding, how could the Commission determine whether
synchronization problems are caused by the apparatus or by the video
programming owner, provider, or distributor?
6. Closed captioning requirements on DVD and Blu-ray players. As
explained in the Order on Reconsideration, adopted with the FNPRM and
published elsewhere in this publication, we provide manufacturers of
DVD players that do not render or pass through closed captions, and
manufacturers of Blu-ray players, with a temporary extension of the
compliance deadline, pending resolution of this FNPRM. The CVAA and our
rules require that apparatus ``be equipped with built-in closed caption
decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closed-captioned
video programming.'' Thus, we invite comment on the closed captioning
requirements that we should impose on DVD players that do not render or
pass through closed captions, and on Blu-ray players with regard to
Blu-ray discs and DVDs.\3\ Commenters should provide information on the
costs and benefits of imposing such requirements, including the
technical aspects of what would be required to make closed captioning
accessible on such devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ We understand that many, if not all, Blu-ray players are
``backward compatible'' with DVDs, that is, they are able to play
both Blu-ray discs and DVDs. We seek comment on this understanding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. We seek comment on whether we should permit DVD players that do
not currently render or pass through closed captions to include an
analog output to pass through closed captions. As explained in the
Order on Reconsideration, the record demonstrates that the DVD player
market is declining. Accordingly, how would such a regulation on DVD
players impact the market? In the context of low-cost DVD players,
would there be sufficient consumer demand for manufacturers to continue
manufacturing such players if faced with the costs of rendering or
adding an analog output? Given that Blu-ray players are able to play
both Blu-ray discs and DVDs, should we consider Blu-ray players that do
not render closed captions but include an analog output to pass through
closed captions on DVDs to comply with the closed captioning
requirements of the CVAA? Is there a consumer expectation that
captioned DVDs should be viewable on a backward compatible Blu-ray
player? Should Blu-ray players that include an analog output that pass
through captions be granted a waiver of the Commission's
interconnection mechanism rule (as we have granted in the Order on
Reconsideration in the DVD context)? Alternatively, should we require
Blu-ray players to render captions from DVDs? We seek specific comment
on the costs and benefits of the approaches considered herein as well
as on the technical aspects of what would be required to effectuate
these requirements. For example, would manufacturers be required to
implement a software or hardware upgrade? Similarly, what are the costs
and benefits of requiring all DVD and Blu-ray players to include an
analog output, and what technical steps are necessary to achieve this?
In addition, what would be an appropriate deadline for compliance with
the closed captioning requirements for DVD players that do not render
or pass through captions and for Blu-ray players?
8. With regard to Blu-ray players playing Blu-ray discs, as we
noted above, there is not currently an industry-wide standard for
closed captioning on Blu-ray discs. Thus, Blu-ray discs do not
currently contain captions. Does this fact make it more important that
Blu-ray player manufacturers take steps to ensure that captions from
DVDs can be rendered or passed through? Should we require Blu-ray
players to render or pass through captions from Blu-ray discs within a
certain period of time with the expectation that doing so would spur
the industry to prioritize developing a standard for discs and include
captions on Blu-ray discs? Alternatively, given that Blu-ray discs as
well as DVDs

[[Page 39693]]

currently include subtitles,\4\ we seek comment on whether, as a legal
matter, rendering or passing through subtitles could satisfy section
303(u)'s requirement that the Blu-ray players and DVD players ``be
equipped with built-in closed caption decoder circuitry or capability
designed to display closed-captioned video programming.'' Could the
rendering or passing through subtitles be considered an ``alternate
means'' of compliance with our rules? \5\ Or, should subtitles or SDH
only be considered an alternative means of compliance to the extent
that they can be made compatible with the technical capabilities set
forth in our apparatus closed captioning rules (for example, the
ability to change text font and size)? We seek specific comment on what
steps the industry, including content providers, must take to provide
this type of ``enhanced'' subtitles or SDH. For example, what technical
steps can manufacturers take in this regard?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ Subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing (``SDH'') do not
provide all of the features available with closed captions.
\5\ See Public Law 111-260, section 203(e) (``An entity may meet
the requirements of sections 303(u), 303(z), and 330(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934 through alternate means than those
prescribed by regulations pursuant to subsection (d) if the
requirements of those sections are met, as determined by the
Commission.''). In the Report and Order, the Commission recognized
that SDH does not offer the same user control features as closed
captioning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Procedural Matters

A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

9. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (``RFA''),\6\ the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') concerning 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 IRFA. Comments must be
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines
for comments provided on the first page of the item. The Commission
will send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (``SBA'').\7\
In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be
published in the Federal Register.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ 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).
\7\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
\8\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rule Changes
10. In the FNPRM, we seek further comment on the potential
imposition of closed captioning synchronization requirements for
covered apparatus, and on how DVD and Blu-ray players can fulfill the
closed captioning requirements of the statute. These issues were raised
by petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order, which
implemented portions of sections 202 and 203 of the Twenty-First
Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (``CVAA'')
by adopting rules governing the closed captioning requirements for the
owners, providers, and distributors of video programming delivered via
Internet protocol (``IP'') and rules governing the closed captioning
capabilities of certain apparatus on which consumers view video
programming. Specifically, in response to the Petition for
Reconsideration of Consumer Groups, we issue an FNPRM to obtain further
information necessary to determine whether the Commission should impose
synchronization requirements on device manufacturers. Such
synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that
render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data
included with the video programming the apparatus receives. Separately,
in response to issues raised by the Petition for Reconsideration of the
Consumer Electronics Association, the FNPRM seeks comment on how DVD
and Blu-ray players can fulfill the closed captioning requirements of
the statute.
11. Our goal in this proceeding remains to implement Congress's
intent to better enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to
view video programming. In considering the requests made in the three
petitions for reconsideration received, we have evaluated the effect on
consumers who are deaf or hard of hearing as well as the cost of
compliance to affected entities.
2. Legal Basis
12. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to the Twenty-First
Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Pub. L.
111-260, 124 Stat. 2751, and the authority found in sections 4(i),
4(j), 303, 330(b), 713, and 716 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 303, 330(b), 613, and 617.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposals Will Apply
13. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.\9\ The RFA generally
defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the
terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small
governmental jurisdiction.'' \10\ In addition, the term ``small
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern''
under the Small Business Act.\11\ A small business concern is one
which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in
its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the SBA.\12\ Below, we provide a description of such
small entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such small
entities, where feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
\10\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
\11\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition
of ``small business concern'' in 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 U.S.C. 601(3).
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 632. Application of the statutory criteria of
dominance in its field of operation and independence are sometimes
difficult to apply in the context of broadcast television.
Accordingly, the Commission's statistical account of television
stations may be over-inclusive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at
the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards.
First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.5 million
small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small
organizations. Finally, 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.'' Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that
there were 89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United
States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may

[[Page 39694]]

qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that
most governmental jurisdictions are small.
15. Cable Television Distribution 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.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard
for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer
employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 1,906 firms that
operated that year. Of those 1,906, 1,880 had fewer than 1000
employees, and 26 firms had more than 1000 employees. Thus under this
category and the associated small business size standard, the majority
of such firms can be considered small.
16. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has also developed
its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate
regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is
one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers nationwide. Industry data
indicate that all but ten cable operators nationwide are small under
this size standard. In addition, under the Commission's rules, a
``small system'' is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers.
Industry data indicate that, of 6,101 systems nationwide, 4,410 systems
have under 10,000 subscribers, and an additional 258 systems have
10,000-19,999 subscribers. Thus, under this standard, most cable
systems are small.
17. Cable System Operators. The Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system
operators, which is ``a cable operator that, directly or through an
affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed
$250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that an operator serving
fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator if its
annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all
its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Industry
data indicate that all but nine cable operators nationwide are small
under this subscriber size standard. We note that the Commission
neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system
operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues
exceed $250 million, and therefore we are unable to estimate more
accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as
small under this size standard.
18. 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. DBS, by exception, is now included in the
SBA's broad economic census category, ``Wired Telecommunications
Carriers,'' which was developed for small wireline firms. Under this
category, the SBA deems a wireline business to be small if it has 1,500
or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996
establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated
with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 operated with fewer than 100
employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business
size standard, the majority of such firms can be considered small.
Currently, only two entities provide DBS service, which requires a
great investment of capital for operation: DIRECTV and EchoStar
Communications Corporation (``EchoStar'') (marketed as the DISH
Network). Each currently offers subscription services. DIRECTV and
EchoStar each report annual revenues that are in excess of the
threshold for a small business. Because DBS service requires
significant capital, we believe it is unlikely that a small entity as
defined by the SBA would have the financial wherewithal to become a DBS
service provider.
19. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. Two economic census
categories address the satellite industry. The first category has a
small business size standard of $15 million or less in average annual
receipts, under SBA rules. The second has a size standard of $25
million or less in annual receipts.
20. The category of ``Satellite Telecommunications'' ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications
services to other establishments in the telecommunications and
broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications
signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite
telecommunications.'' Census Bureau data for 2007 show that 607
Satellite Telecommunications establishments operated for that entire
year. Of this total, 533 establishments had annual receipts of under
$10 million or less, and 74 establishments had receipts of $10 million
or more. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of
Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be
affected by our action.
21. The second category, i.e., ``All Other Telecommunications,''
comprises ``establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems.
Establishments providing Internet services or voice over Internet
protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications
connections are also included in this industry.'' For this category,
Census Bureau data for 2007 shows that there were a total of 2,623
establishments that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,478
establishments had annual receipts of under $10 million and 145
establishments had annual receipts of $10 million or more.
Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of All Other
Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by
our action.
22. Television Broadcasting. This Economic Census category
``comprises establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting images
together with sound. These establishments operate television
broadcasting studios and facilities for the programming and
transmission of programs to the public.'' The SBA has created the
following small business size standard for Television Broadcasting
firms: Those having $14 million or less in annual receipts. The
Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial television
stations to be 1,387. In addition, according to Commission staff review
of the BIA Advisory Services, LLC's Media Access Pro Television
Database on March 28, 2012, about 950 of an estimated 1,300 commercial
television stations (or approximately 73 percent) had revenues of $14
million or less. We therefore estimate that the majority of commercial
television broadcasters are small entities.
23. We note, however, that in assessing whether a business concern
qualifies as small under the above definition, business (control)
affiliations

[[Page 39695]]

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. In addition, an element of the
definition of ``small business'' is that the entity not be dominant in
its field of operation. We are unable at this time to define or
quantify the criteria that would establish whether a specific
television station is dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly,
the estimate of small businesses to which rules may apply does not
exclude any television station from the definition of a small business
on this basis and is therefore possibly over-inclusive to that extent.
24. In addition, the Commission has estimated the number of
licensed noncommercial educational (NCE) television stations to be 396.
These stations are non-profit, and therefore considered to be small
entities.
25. Open Video Systems. The open video system (``OVS'') framework
was established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily recognized
options for the provision of video programming services by local
exchange carriers. The OVS framework provides opportunities for the
distribution of video programming other than through cable systems.
Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within
the SBA small business size standard covering cable services, which is
``Wired Telecommunications Carriers.'' The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms
having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there
were 31,996 establishments that operated that year. Of those 31,996,
1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and 30,178 operated with
fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated
small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be
considered small. In addition, we note that the Commission has
certified some OVS operators, with some now providing service.
Broadband service providers (``BSPs'') are currently the only
significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises. The
Commission does not have financial or employment information regarding
the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be
operational. Thus, at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as
small entities.
26. Cable and Other Subscription Programming. The Census Bureau
defines this category as follows: ``This industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in operating studios and facilities
for the broadcasting of programs on a subscription or fee basis. These
establishments produce programming in their own facilities or acquire
programming from external sources. The programming material is usually
delivered to a third party, such as cable systems or direct-to-home
satellite systems, for transmission to viewers.'' The SBA has developed
a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such
firms having $15 million dollars or less in annual revenues. To gauge
small business prevalence in the Cable and Other Subscription
Programming industries, the Commission relies on data currently
available from the U.S. Census for the year 2007. Census Bureau data
for 2007 show that there were 659 establishments in this category that
operated for the entire year. Of that number, 462 operated with annual
revenues of $9,999,999 million dollars or less, and 197 operated with
annual revenues of 10 million or more. Thus, under this category and
associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be
considered small.
27. Motion Picture and Video Production. The Census Bureau defines
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in producing, or producing and distributing motion
pictures, videos, television programs, or television commercials.'' We
note that firms in this category may be engaged in various industries,
including cable programming. Specific figures are not available
regarding how many of these firms produce and/or distribute programming
for cable television. The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for this category, which is: all such firms having $29.5
million dollars or less in annual revenues. To gauge small business
prevalence in the Motion Picture and Video Production industries, the
Commission relies on data currently available from the U.S. Census for
the year 2007. Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data
from the 2002 Census, show that there were 9,095 firms in this category
that operated for the entire year. Of these, 8,995 had annual receipts
of $24,999,999 or less, and 100 had annual receipts ranging from not
less than $25,000,000 to $100,000,000 or more. Thus, under this
category and associated small business size standard, the majority of
firms can be considered small.
28. Motion Picture and Video Distribution. The Census Bureau
defines this category as follows: ``This industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in acquiring distribution rights and
distributing film and video productions to motion picture theaters,
television networks and stations, and exhibitors.'' We note that firms
in this category may be engaged in various industries, including cable
programming. Specific figures are not available regarding how many of
these firms produce and/or distribute programming for cable television.
The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category,
which is: all such firms having $29.5 million dollars or less in annual
revenues. To gauge small business prevalence in the Motion Picture and
Video Distribution industries, the Commission relies on data currently
available from the U.S. Census for the year 2007. Census Bureau data
for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that
there were 450 firms in this category that operated for the entire
year. Of these, 434 had annual receipts of $24,999,999 or less, and 16
had annual receipts ranging from not less than $25,000,000 to
$100,000,000 or more. Thus, under this category and associated small
business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
29. Small Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. We have included small
incumbent local exchange carriers in this present RFA analysis. A
``small business'' under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the
pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone
communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and ``is not
dominant in its field of operation.'' The SBA's Office of Advocacy
contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent local exchange
carriers are not dominant in their field of operation because any such
dominance is not ``national'' in scope. We have therefore included
small incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis, although
we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses
and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
30. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (``LECs''). Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate
size standard under SBA rules is for the category ``Wired
Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for
2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that operated that
year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100 employees, and
30,178

[[Page 39696]]

operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus, under this category and
the associated small business size standard, the majority of such firms
can be considered small.
31. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, Competitive Access
Providers (CAPs), ``Shared-Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other
Local Service Providers.'' Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard specifically for these service
providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the
category ``Wired Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under that size
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
Census data for 2007 shows that there were 31,996 establishments that
operated that year. Of those 31,996, 1,818 operated with more than 100
employees, and 30,178 operated with fewer than 100 employees. Thus,
under this category and the associated small business size standard,
the majority of such firms can be considered small. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange
service, competitive access providers, ``Shared-Tenant Service
Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers'' are small entities.
32. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as
follows: ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in
manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless
communications equipment. Examples of products made by these
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for ``Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless
Communications Equipment Manufacturing,'' which is: all such firms
having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for
2007, there were 919 establishments that operated for part or all of
the entire year. Of those 919 establishments, 771 operated with 99 or
fewer employees, and 148 operated with 100 or more employees. Thus,
under that size standard, the majority of establishments can be
considered small.
33. Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing. The SBA has classified
the manufacturing of audio and video equipment under in NAICS Codes
classification scheme as an industry in which a manufacturer is small
if it has less than 750 employees. Data contained in the 2007 Economic
Census indicate that 491 establishments in this category operated for
part or all of the entire year. Of those 491 establishments, 456
operated with 99 or fewer employees, and 35 operated with 100 or more
employees. Thus, under the applicable size standard, a majority of
manufacturers of audio and video equipment may be considered small.
34. Internet Publishing and Broadcasting and Web Search Portals.
The Census Bureau defines this category to include ``. . .
establishments primarily engaged in 1) publishing and/or broadcasting
content on the Internet exclusively or 2) operating Web sites that use
a search engine to generate and maintain extensive databases of
Internet addresses and content in an easily searchable format (and
known as Web search portals). The publishing and broadcasting
establishments in this industry do not provide traditional (non-
Internet) versions of the content that they publish or broadcast. They
provide textual, audio, and/or video content of general or specific
interest on the Internet exclusively. Establishments known as Web
search portals often provide additional Internet services, such as
email, connections to other Web sites, auctions, news, and other
limited content, and serve as a home base for Internet users.''
35. In this category, the SBA has deemed an Internet publisher or
Internet broadcaster or the provider of a web search portal on the
Internet to be small if it has fewer than 500 employees. For this
category of manufacturers, Census data for 2007, which supersede
similar data from the 2002 Census, show that there were 2,705 such
firms that operated that year. Of those 2,705 firms, 2,682
(approximately 99%) had fewer than 500 employees and, thus, would be
deemed small under the applicable SBA size standard. Accordingly, the
majority of establishments in this category can be considered small
under that standard.
36. Closed Captioning Services. These entities would be indirectly
affected by our proposed action. The SBA has developed two small
business size standards that may be used for closed captioning
services. The two size standards track the economic census categories,
``Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services'' and ``Court
Reporting and Stenotype Services.''
37. The first category of Teleproduction and Other Postproduction
Services ``comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing
specialized motion picture or video postproduction services, such as
editing, film/tape transfers, subtitling, credits, closed captioning,
and animation and special effects.'' The relevant size standard for
small businesses in these services is an annual revenue of less than
$29.5 million. For this category, Census Bureau Data for 2007 indicate
that there were 1,605 firms that operated in this category for the
entire year. Of that number, 1,597 had receipts totaling less than
$29,500,000. Consequently we estimate that the majority of
Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services firms are small
entities that might be affected by our proposed actions.
38. The second category of Court Reporting and Stenotype Services
``comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing verbatim
reporting and stenotype recording of live legal proceedings and
transcribing subsequent recorded materials.'' The size standard for
small businesses in these services is an annual revenue of less than $7
million. For this category, Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there
were 2,706 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total,
2,590 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and 19 firms had
receipts of $5 million to $9,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that
the majority of Court Reporting and Stenotype Services firms are small
entities that might be affected by our proposed action.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
39. The FNPRM invites comment on whether the Commission should
impose closed captioning synchronization requirements on apparatus.
Such synchronization requirements could provide that all apparatus that
render closed captions must do so consistent with the timing data
included with the video programming the apparatus receives. The FNPRM
invites comment on the extent to which apparatus are the cause of
synchronization problems, and on the means by which manufacturers could
address closed caption synchronization. The FNPRM also asks whether
video programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited
than manufacturers to ensure caption quality, including
synchronization, and it asks about the costs and benefits of imposing
caption synchronization requirements on apparatus manufacturers.
Separately, the FNPRM seeks comment on what closed captioning
requirements we should impose on manufacturers of DVD players that do
not render or pass through closed captions, and on manufacturers of
Blu-ray players with

[[Page 39697]]

regard to Blu-ray players playing Blu-ray discs and playing DVDs,
including specific questions about the rendering or pass through of
closed captions. The FNPRM also seeks comment on the costs and benefits
of imposing such requirements. Information received in response to the
FNPRM will enable the Commission to consider the costs that would be
incurred by affected entities, including smaller entities.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
40. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

41. We note that, pursuant to rules and policies previously adopted
in the Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission may grant
exemptions to the IP closed captioning rules adopted pursuant to
section 202 of the CVAA where a petitioner has shown that compliance
would present an economic burden (i.e., a significant difficulty or
expense), and may grant exemptions to the apparatus rules adopted
pursuant to section 203 of the CVAA where a petitioner has shown that
compliance is not achievable (i.e., cannot be accomplished with
reasonable effort or expense) or is not technically feasible. This
exemption process enables the Commission to address the impact of the
rules on individual entities, including smaller entities, and to modify
the application of the rules to accommodate individual circumstances.
Further, a video programming provider's or owner's de minimis failure
to comply with the IP closed captioning rules shall not be treated as a
violation, and parties may use alternate means of compliance to the
rules adopted pursuant to either section 202 or section 203 of the
CVAA. Individual entities, including smaller entities, may benefit from
these provisions.
42. Regarding the specific issue of synchronization requirements as
discussed in the FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on whether video
programming owners, providers, and distributors are better suited than
manufacturers to ensure caption quality, including synchronization. The
Commission also seeks comment on what requirements it should impose on
apparatus, to the extent that apparatus cause closed captioning
synchronization problems. Accordingly, the Commission seeks to allocate
responsibilities appropriately.
43. Regarding the specific issue of DVD players that do not render
or pass through closed captions and Blu-ray players as discussed in the
FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on the costs and benefits of
imposing closed captioning requirements, including the technical
aspects of what would be required to make closed captioning accessible
on such devices. Accordingly, the Commission seeks to balance the costs
and benefits appropriately in crafting a final rule.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
44. None.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

45. The FNPRM does not contain proposed information collection(s)
subject to the PRA, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does
not contain any new or modified ``information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

C. Ex Parte Rules

46. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy
of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral
presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a
different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda
summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with rule Sec. 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed
by Sec. 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and
memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format
(e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this
proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte
rules.

D. Filing Requirements

47. Comments and Replies. 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 the
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). 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/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy 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 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand

[[Page 39698]]

deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes and boxes 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.
48. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex
parte submissions will be available for public inspection during
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., CY-A257, Washington,
DC, 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents
will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe
Acrobat.
49. People with Disabilities. To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the FCC's
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice),
(202) 418-0432 (TTY).

E. Additional Information

50. For additional information on this proceeding, contact Diana
Sokolow, Diana.Sokolow@fcc.gov, or Maria Mullarkey,
Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202)
418-2120.

IV. Ordering Clauses

51. Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to the Twenty-First
Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Public Law
111-260, 124 Stat. 2751, and the authority found in sections 4(i),
4(j), 303, 330(b), 713, and 716 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 303, 330(b), 613, and 617, this
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted, effective thirty (30)
days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.
52. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MB Docket No. 11-
154, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 79

Cable television operators, Communications equipment, Multichannel
video programming distributors (MVPDs), Satellite television service
providers, Television broadcasters.

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 79 as follows:

PART 79--CLOSED CAPTIONING AND VIDEO DESCRIPTION OF VIDEO
PROGRAMMING

0
1. The authority citation for Part 79 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 303, 307, 309, 310,
330, 544a, 613, 617.

0
2. Amend Sec. 79.103 to add paragraph (c)(12) to read as follows:

Sec. 79.103 Closed caption decoder requirements for all apparatus.

* * * * *
(c) * * *
(12) Synchronization. All apparatus that render closed captions
must do so consistent with the timing data included with the video
programming the apparatus receives.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-15722 Filed 7-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.