Authorizing Permissive Use of the “Next Generation” Broadcast Television Standard, 4998-5028 [2018-01473]
Download as PDF
4998
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 15, 73, 74, and 76
[GN Docket No. 16–142; FCC 17–158]
Authorizing Permissive Use of the
‘‘Next Generation’’ Broadcast
Television Standard
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC or
Commission) authorizes television
broadcasters to use the ‘‘Next
Generation’’ broadcast television (Next
Gen TV) transmission standard, also
called ‘‘ATSC 3.0’’ or ‘‘3.0,’’ on a
voluntary, market-driven basis. This
authorization is subject to broadcasters
continuing to deliver current-generation
digital television (DTV) service, using
the ATSC 1.0 transmission standard,
also called ‘‘ATSC 1.0’’ or ‘‘1.0,’’ to their
viewers.
DATES: Effective March 5, 2018, except
for §§ 73.3801, 73.6029, and 74.782
which contain information collection
requirements that are not effective until
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). The Commission
will publish a document in the Federal
Register announcing the effective date
for these sections. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed
in this rule is approved by the Director
of the Federal Register, as of March 5,
2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information, contact Evan
Baranoff, Evan.Baranoff@fcc.gov, of the
Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202)
418–7142, or Matthew Hussey,
Matthew.Hussey@fcc.gov, of the Office
of Engineering and Technology, (202)
418–3619. Direct press inquiries to
Janice Wise at (202) 418–8165. For
additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act information
collection requirements contained in
this document, send an email to PRA@
fcc.gov or contact Cathy Williams at
(202) 418–2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order (R&O), FCC 17–158, adopted
on November 16, 2017 and released on
November 20, 2017. The full text of this
document is available electronically via
the FCC’s Electronic Document
Management System (EDOCS) website
at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
or via the FCC’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) website at https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. (Documents will
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
be available electronically in ASCII,
Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.)
This document is also available for
public inspection and copying during
regular business hours in the FCC
Reference Information Center, which is
located in Room CY–A257 at FCC
Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20554. The Reference
Information Center is open to the public
Monday through Thursday from 8:00
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday from 8:00
a.m. to 11:30 a.m. 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). This document incorporates by
reference two ATSC 3.0 standards of the
Advanced Television Systems
Committee (ATSC): (1) ATSC A/
321:2016 ‘‘System Discovery &
Signaling’’ (A/321) and (2) A/322:2017
‘‘Physical Layer Protocol’’ (A/322).
These standards are available from
ATSC, 1776 K Street NW, 8th Floor,
Washington, DC 20006; or at the ATSC
website: www.atsc.org/standards/atsc-30-standards/.
Synopsis
I. Authorizing Voluntary Deployment of
ATSC 3.0
1. In this Report and Order (R&O), we
authorize television broadcasters to use
the ‘‘Next Generation’’ broadcast
television (Next Gen TV) transmission
standard, also called ‘‘ATSC 3.0’’ or
‘‘3.0,’’ on a voluntary, market-driven
basis. This authorization is subject to
broadcasters continuing to deliver
current-generation digital television
(DTV) service, using the ATSC 1.0
transmission standard, also called
‘‘ATSC 1.0’’ or ‘‘1.0,’’ to their viewers.
ATSC 3.0 is the new TV transmission
standard developed by Advanced
Television Systems Committee as the
world’s first internet Protocol (IP)-based
broadcast transmission platform. It
merges the capabilities of over-the-air
(OTA) broadcasting with the broadband
viewing and information delivery
methods of the internet, using the same
6 MHz channels presently allocated for
DTV service. This new TV transmission
standard promises to allow broadcasters
to innovate, improve service, and use
their spectrum more efficiently. It also
has the potential to enable broadcasters
to provide consumers with a more
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
immersive and enjoyable television
viewing experience on both home and
mobile screens. In addition, ATSC 3.0
will allow broadcasters to offer
enhanced public safety capabilities,
such as geo-targeting of emergency
alerts to tailor information to particular
communities and emergency alerting
capable of waking up sleeping devices
to warn consumers of imminent
emergencies, and advanced accessibility
options. With today’s action, we aim to
facilitate private sector innovation and
promote American leadership in the
global broadcast industry.
A. Authorization of Voluntary Use of
ATSC 3.0 Transmissions and Treatment
Under the Act
2. The Commission in this R&O
adopts the proposal in the Next Gen TV
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Next
Gen TV NPRM), 82 FR 13285 (March 10,
2017), to authorize ATSC 3.0 as an
optional broadcast television
transmission standard. All parties who
commented on the issue support our
proposal to authorize ATSC 3.0 on a
voluntary, market-driven basis.
Broadcasters will be permitted, but not
required, to transmit ATSC 3.0 signals if
they comply with the requirements in
this Order and any other relevant rules
and statutory provisions. Alternatively,
broadcasters may choose to continue
transmitting their signals solely in the
currently authorized ATSC 1.0
transmission standard.
3. We conclude that stations
transmitting ATSC 3.0 signals will be
engaged in ‘‘broadcasting’’ within the
meaning of the Communications Act
(the ‘‘Act’’). The Act defines
‘‘broadcasting’’ as ‘‘the dissemination of
radio communications intended to be
received by the public, directly or by the
intermediary of relay stations,’’ and a
‘‘broadcast station’’ as ‘‘a radio station
equipped to engage in broadcasting.’’
We proposed to interpret the Act in this
manner in the Next Gen TV NPRM, and
no commenter objects to this reading of
the statute. This conclusion applies to
stations transmitting both an ATSC 1.0
and an ATSC 3.0 signal pursuant to the
local simulcasting requirement we
adopt in this Order and stations
transmitting only an ATSC 3.0 signal.
Accordingly, all of the restrictions and
obligations that the Act imposes on
television broadcasters, including
obligations or restrictions on television
broadcast licenses, licensees, stations, or
services, will be applicable to
broadcasters using the ATSC 3.0
transmission standard.
4. The Act includes, for example,
restrictions on foreign ownership of
broadcast licenses and licensees and
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
obligations for broadcasters to provide
‘‘reasonable access’’ to candidates for
federal elective office and to afford
‘‘equal opportunities’’ to candidates for
any public office. Television
broadcasters also are subject to statutory
obligations to make certain disclosures
in connection with advertisements that
discuss a ‘‘political matter of national
importance’’ and to disclose the identity
of program sponsors. In addition, among
other requirements, the Act specifies
that television broadcasters must air
educational programming for children,
limit the amount of commercial material
they include in programming directed to
children, restrict the airing of indecent
programming, and comply with
provisions relating to the rating of video
programming.
5. The Commission has determined
that the definition of ‘‘broadcasting’’ in
the Act applies to services intended to
be received by an indiscriminate public
and has identified three indicia of a lack
of such intent: (1) The service is not
receivable on conventional television
sets and requires a licensee or
programmer-provided special antennae
and/or signal converter so the signal can
be received in the home; (2) the
programming is encrypted in a way that
‘‘makes it unusable by the public’’ and
that is not ‘‘enjoyable without the aid of
decoders’’; and (3) the provider and the
viewer are engaged in a private
contractual relationship.1 Based on the
rules we adopt in this Order to permit
the voluntary use of ATSC 3.0 and the
descriptions of ATSC 3.0 transmissions
in the record, we find that Next Gen TV
service will be intended to be received
by all members of the public. We are
requiring Next Gen TV stations to
provide one free, over-the-air video
programming stream broadcast in ATSC
3.0. Thus, the programming on this
stream will not require a private
contractual agreement between the
broadcaster and the viewers.
Furthermore, although TV receivers
capable of receiving ATSC 3.0 signals
without the use of additional equipment
are not yet available in the United
States, ATSC 3.0 transmissions will be
receivable eventually on conventional
television sets. We expect that television
receivers capable of receiving ATSC 3.0
signals will quickly become available as
consumers realize the benefits of Next
Gen TV. Accordingly, we conclude that
1 Although NAB states that ‘‘free Next Gen signals
may be encrypted,’’ it also maintains that ‘‘viewers
will not require special equipment supplied and
programmed by the broadcaster to decode Next Gen
signals.’’ Programming that is encrypted must not
require special equipment supplied and
programmed by the broadcaster to decode.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
Next Gen TV stations will be engaged in
‘‘broadcasting’’ as defined in the Act.
6. ATVA notes that at some point
ATSC 3.0 service may include two-way,
interactive service offerings to
individual viewers (such as targeted
advertising and localized content) and
asserts that at some point these service
offerings may become so individualized
that they no longer constitute
‘‘broadcasting’’ within the meaning of
the Act. ATVA suggests that the
Commission ‘‘consider where that point
lies sooner rather than later to avoid
uncertainty for broadcasters, MVPDs,
and others.’’ Given that the ATSC 3.0
standard is new and will be deployed
on a voluntary basis, it is not yet known
precisely what interactive services Next
Gen TV broadcasters may offer or the
extent to which differentiated content
may be provided to individual viewers.
Moreover, even if Next Gen TV
broadcasters offer some two-way
interactive services with individualized
content, not all viewers may be
interested in such individualized
services, so we expect that Next Gen TV
broadcasters will continue to provide an
undifferentiated broadcast service to the
general public. We therefore find that it
is unnecessary to speculate at this time
as to whether certain ATSC 3.0 service
offerings may become so individualized
that they would no longer meet the
definition of ‘‘broadcasting.’’ 2
B. Local Simulcasting
7. As originally proposed by
Petitioners, and as we proposed in the
Next Gen TV NPRM, we require Next
Gen TV broadcasters to air a local
simulcast of the primary video
programming stream of their ATSC 3.0
channel in ATSC 1.0 format. We find
that local simulcasting is a critical
component of the Commission’s
authorization of ATSC 3.0 as a
voluntary transmission standard. We
discuss our local simulcasting
requirement below, including what we
mean by local simulcasting and the
coverage area that must be served by the
1.0 simulcast signal. We also address
issues related to the location and
coverage area of ATSC 3.0 signals,
waivers and exceptions to the
simulcasting requirement, and licensing
procedures for authorizing Next Gen TV
broadcasters.
2 We note, however, that two-way communication
may be subject to other provisions of the
Communications Act and Commission rules,
including those that govern the accessibility of
advanced communications services by people with
disabilities.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
4999
1. Local Simulcasting Requirement
8. Our local simulcasting requirement
will be effectuated through partnerships
that broadcasters that wish to provide
Next Gen TV service must enter into
with other broadcasters in their local
markets. Specifically, Next Gen TV
broadcasters must partner with another
television station (i.e., a temporary
‘‘host’’ station) in their local market to
either: (1) Air an ATSC 3.0 channel at
the temporary host’s facility, while
using their original facility to continue
to provide an ATSC 1.0 simulcast
channel, or (2) air an ATSC 1.0
simulcast channel at the temporary
host’s facility, while converting their
original facility to the ATSC 3.0
standard in order to provide a 3.0
channel. In either case, Next Gen TV
broadcasters must simulcast the primary
video programming stream of their
ATSC 3.0 channel in an ATSC 1.0
format, so that viewers will continue to
receive ATSC 1.0 service.
9. We apply our local simulcasting
requirement only to the primary video
programming stream aired by Next Gen
TV broadcasters on their ATSC 3.0
channels.3 Next Gen TV stations may be
able to transmit multiple streams of
programming in ATSC 3.0, as many do
today in ATSC 1.0. Although we
encourage those Next Gen TV
broadcasters that elect to air multiple
streams of ATSC 3.0 programming to
also simulcast more than a single
programming stream, we will require
them to simulcast only their primary
stream in ATSC 1.0 format.4
Commenters generally agree that any
local simulcasting requirement should
apply to a Next Gen TV station’s
primary stream. We give broadcasters
discretion to select the primary stream
for purposes of our local simulcasting
requirement.5 Because broadcasters
have a strong incentive to provide
continuity of service to existing viewers,
we believe they will elect to simulcast
the programming stream that viewers
expect to be able to receive, such as a
stream containing network
3 We note that the term ‘‘primary’’ is also used in
the carriage context to refer to the stream for which
a station demands mandatory carriage. That stream
generally contains network programming for
network affiliates or the station’s most popular
programming for non-network stations.
4 We also do not require Next Gen TV
broadcasters that currently air multicast streams to
continue to do so on their ATSC 1.0 simulcast
channel. The provision of multicast channels is
discretionary, and we decline to adopt rules
requiring broadcasters who currently air such
channels to continue to do so.
5 This is consistent with our decision in the
context of the transition from analog to digital
television.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5000
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
programming 6 or the stream that has the
largest number of viewers for nonnetwork stations.7 We will monitor the
deployment of ATSC 3.0 and the
effectiveness of our local simulcasting
requirement in protecting viewers and
will reconsider our approach if
necessary.
10. The Commission intends that the
local simulcasting requirement be
temporary.8 The Commission will
monitor the pace of the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0 both nationally
and market-by-market, including the
rollout of 3.0 service by television
broadcasters, the penetration of ATSC
3.0-ready TV sets and other converter
equipment, and the extent to which
MVPDs have deployed 3.0 equipment.
As we proposed in the Next Gen TV
NPRM, we will determine in a later
proceeding when it would be
appropriate for the Commission to
eliminate the requirement that
broadcasters continue to provide an
ATSC 1.0 signal.9
11. We find that local simulcasting is
essential to the deployment of Next Gen
TV service on a voluntary, marketdriven basis for all stakeholders, and we
agree with the many commenters who
support a requirement that broadcasters
implementing Next Gen TV must
continue to air at least one ATSC 1.0
programming stream.10 Local
simulcasting is necessary because ATSC
3.0 service is not backward-compatible
with existing TV sets or receivers,
which have only ATSC 1.0 and analog
tuners. This means that consumers will
not be able to view ATSC 3.0
transmissions on their existing
televisions without additional
equipment. As the Petition recognized
and as discussed in the Next Gen TV
NPRM, local simulcasting is a means to
6 We note that broadcasters may also have a
contractual obligation, through their network
affiliation agreements, to continue to provide
certain programming to viewers in the current DTV
standard.
7 Broadcasters argue they have a strong economic
incentive to continue to serve their viewers.
8 We anticipate that Next Gen TV broadcasters
that initiate 3.0 service at another location will
ultimately return to their existing licensed facility
and convert that facility from 1.0 to 3.0 technology.
9 The commenters who address this issue agree
that this issue should be handled in a separate
proceeding. NAB agrees that stations should
continue to transmit a 1.0 signal until the
Commission determines that it is appropriate to
sunset that requirement, but argues that the
requirement that the 1.0 signal be substantially
similar to the 3.0 signal should apply only for three
years.
10 Next Gen TV broadcasters may voluntarily air
more than one ATSC 1.0 programming stream, but
are required to air only one ATSC 1.0 simulcast
channel.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
address this challenge.11 With local
simulcasting, viewers will be able to
continue to watch a Next Gen TV
station’s programming without having
to purchase new TV sets or converter
equipment to receive ATSC 3.0 service.
Thus, as Petitioners explain, ‘‘local
simulcasting will permit uninterrupted
service to continue as the American
public embraces Next Generation TV
reception equipment, and will permit
this innovative new standard to be
implemented without necessitating new
simulcast channels from the
Commission.’’
12. To avoid either forcing viewers to
acquire new equipment or depriving
them of television service, it is critical
that broadcasters continue to provide
service using the current ATSC 1.0
standard to deliver DTV service while
the marketplace adopts devices
compatible with the new 3.0
transmission standard. Television sets
capable of receiving ATSC 3.0 signals
are currently being developed in South
Korea,12 but are not yet commercially
available in the United States. We
recognize that 3.0 capable equipment
likely will be produced for the U.S.
market once the 3.0 standard is
approved and that it will be possible for
consumers to connect ATSC 3.0
converter devices to many existing
newer television sets through HDMI
ports. Nevertheless, without a local
simulcasting requirement, many
consumers would be forced to purchase
new sets or other equipment in order to
continue viewing over the air
television.13
13. A simulcast mandate applicable to
a Next Gen TV station’s primary 3.0
video programming stream will also
help ensure that MVPDs can continue to
provide the 1.0 signals of Next Gen TV
broadcasters to their subscribers.
According to ATVA and NCTA, the
equipment used by MVPDs today to
receive, transmit, and provide broadcast
signals to viewers via set-top boxes is
incapable of providing an ATSC 3.0
signal in its native format to
subscribers.14 The continued provision
11 Indeed, the Petition asserted that ‘‘the core of
the voluntary, market-driven implementation of
ATSC 3.0 will be local simulcasting.’’
12 According to ATVA, ATSC 3.0 receivers will
become increasingly available in South Korea this
year in advance of 4K Ultra HD broadcasts of the
Winter Olympic Games in Korea in February 2018.
In the United States, ATSC 3.0 is on the air for
testing under FCC experimental authority in several
markets including Baltimore, Cleveland, and
Raleigh.
13 Broadcasters themselves acknowledge the need
to continue to provide ATSC 1.0 service while the
marketplace adapts over time to ATSC 3.0
technology.
14 NCTA claims that cable system costs to convert
to 3.0 equipment could be ‘‘significant.’’ In
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
of a 1.0 signal will help ensure that
MVPDs can continue to carry the 1.0
signal of stations deploying 3.0 without
necessitating MVPDs incur the expense
of converting to 3.0 capable equipment
or acquiring the equipment necessary to
permit reception of an ATSC 3.0 signal
and ‘‘down converting’’ that signal to a
format compatible with legacy
equipment, including set-top boxes.15 In
addition, the local simulcasting
requirement will assist MVPDs,
especially small and rural cable
providers, that rely on OTA reception of
broadcast signals to continue
retransmitting to their subscribers an
uninterrupted ATSC 1.0 OTA signal.
14. We disagree with those
commenters who advocate that the
Commission refrain from adopting a
simulcast mandate on the ground that
broadcasters already have incentives to
ensure continuity of service to viewers
and that they need flexibility to
implement 3.0 service. While we
recognize that broadcasters have a
strong economic incentive to continue
to reach their viewers absent a mandate
to do so, we conclude that codifying and
clarifying this obligation is necessary to
provide certainty to consumers,
broadcasters, MVPDs, and others who
will be affected by the voluntary rollout
of 3.0 service. Accordingly, we decline
to make the simulcasting obligation a
‘‘best efforts’’ requirement, as advocated
by ATBA, or a ‘‘reasonable efforts’’
requirement as proposed by ONE Media.
We recognize, however, that some
degree of flexibility is necessary to
ensure that all stations are able to
deploy 3.0 technology, including those
that cannot find a simulcasting partner.
As discussed below, we will permit
LPTV and TV translator stations the
option of deploying ATSC 3.0 service
without simulcasting (i.e., ‘‘transition
directly’’ to ATSC 3.0) 16 without
requesting a waiver from the
Commission, in recognition of the
addition, according to ATVA and NCTA, even if
broadcast signals could be passed through in a
native ATSC 3.0 format, because of their potentially
higher resolution such signals would consume more
capacity than signals in 1.0 format. The impact on
capacity would be exacerbated by the need for
systems carrying 3.0 signals to also carry and
deliver those signals in 1.0 format because MVPD
subscribers will continue to have television sets
that cannot receive ATSC 3.0 signals for the
foreseeable future. ATVA notes that these capacity
issues pose a problem in particular for satellite
carriers, whose spot beams may be full or nearly
full, and small cable system operators, many of
which do not have spare capacity to devote to
carriage of additional signals in higher-resolution
formats.
15 ATVA and ACA note that MVPD equipment
related to ATSC 3.0 reception is not yet
commercially available.
16 In the Next Gen TV NPRM, we referred to this
practice as a ‘‘flash-cut.’’
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5001
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
unique difficulties these stations may
face in locating a simulcasting partner
and to permit these stations to serve as
3.0 ‘‘host’’ stations for other
broadcasters. In addition, we will
consider requests for waiver of the
simulcast requirements on a case-bycase basis, including requests from full
power and Class A stations to transition
directly from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0. In
the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking published December 20,
2017 (82 FR 60350), we also sought
comment on whether we should permit
Class A and NCE television stations to
transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to
ATSC 3.0 without seeking waivers or
adopt a presumptive waiver standard for
such stations.
15. We permit all television station
classes to participate together in
simulcast arrangements. Thus, a full
power station could partner with one or
more other full power stations or with
one or more Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator stations. We also permit NCE
stations to participate in simulcast
arrangements with commercial stations.
Any Next Gen TV broadcaster that airs
an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal from a
partner host station necessarily must
operate that signal using the technical
facilities of the host. For example, a
Class A, LPTV, or TV translator station
airing a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on a full power
host station will necessarily operate its
1.0 or 3.0 ‘‘guest’’ signal using the
technical facilities of the full power
station, including the higher power
limit specified in 47 CFR part 73.17
Conversely, a full power station airing a
1.0 or 3.0 signal on a Class A, LPTV, or
TV translator station must operate that
signal at the Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator’s lower Part 74 power level.18
Otherwise, stations airing a 1.0 or 3.0
signal on a partner host station will
continue to be obligated to comply with
the programming and other operational
17 Compare 47 CFR 73.622(h) with 47 CFR
74.735(b). An LPTV or TV translator station that
airs a ‘‘guest’’ channel on a partner host full power
or Class A station will obtain ‘‘quasi’’ primary
interference protection for that channel for the
duration of the simulcasting arrangement by virtue
of the fact that the full power or Class A station is
a primary licensee. Although the LPTV or TV
translator will continue to be licensed with
secondary interference protection status, the
primary status of the host full power or Class A
station will protect the ‘‘guest’’ channel aired on the
partner host station from interference or
displacement. This approach is consistent with our
rules for channel sharing between stations with
differing technical rules (full power and Class A
television stations) in the context of the incentive
auction and outside the incentive auction context.
18 A full power or Class A ‘‘guest’’ station airing
a channel on a partner host LPTV or TV translator
station will be subject to displacement with respect
to that channel because the host has secondary
interference protection rights.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
obligations of the station originating the
signal (rather than those of the partner
host station). Thus, a full power Next
Gen TV broadcaster airing a 1.0
simulcast signal on a partner host
simulcast station must continue to
comply with the programming and
operational obligations of a Part 73
licensee. Similarly a Class A station
airing a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on a partner
host station will continue to be
obligated to comply with the
programming and other operational
obligations of a Class A licensee,
including airing a minimum of 18 hours
a day and an average of at least three
hours per week of locally produced
programming each quarter, as required
by 47 CFR 73.6001.19 A reservedchannel full power NCE licensee,
whether it airs a channel on a
commercial partner host station or
serves as a partner host to a commercial
guest channel, will retain its NCE status
and must continue to comply with the
rules applicable to NCE licensees. In
either case, the NCE full power station’s
portion of the use of the 6 MHz channel
will be reserved for NCE-only use.
16. Simulcast agreements must
include provisions outlining each
station’s rights and responsibilities in
the following areas: (i) Access to
facilities, including whether each
licensee will have unrestricted access to
the shared transmission facilities; (ii)
allocation of capacity within the shared
channel; (iii) operation, maintenance,
repair, and modification of facilities,
including a list of all relevant
equipment, a description of each party’s
financial obligations, and any relevant
notice provisions; (iv) the conditions
under which the simulcast agreement
may be terminated, assigned or
transferred; and (v) how a guest’s signal
may be transitioned off the host station.
License applicants must certify that the
agreement contains such provisions. By
requiring stations to address these
issues in their simulcast agreements, we
seek to avoid disputes that could lead to
a disruption in service to the public and
to ensure that each licensee is able to
fulfill its independent obligation to
comply with all pertinent statutory
requirements and our rules.20
17. The provisions that we require in
simulcast agreements are similar to
those we have required in channel
19 In addition, a Class A licensee that airs a guest
signal on a full power host station will continue to
be subject to the restrictions set forth in 47 U.S.C.
336(f)(7)(B).
20 We do not anticipate becoming involved in the
resolution of stations’ private contractual disputes
regarding simulcast arrangements.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sharing agreements (CSAs).21 We note
that simulcast arrangements differ from
CSAs in that the former are temporary
and because, unlike channel sharing,
each guest station can default back to its
own licensed facility in the event the
parties face irreconcilable differences.
Further, unlike in the channel sharing
context, the host station in a simulcast
arrangement retains the right to resume
use of the entire 6 MHz channel, subject
to the terms of the simulcast agreement,
without prior Commission approval.22
We do not require that local simulcast
agreements be submitted to the
Commission as part of a license
application, as these arrangements are
intended to be temporary. We also
conclude that such a requirement would
be unnecessarily burdensome as Next
Gen TV broadcasters may need to
change to a new partner host station,
and therefore enter into a new simulcast
agreement, or modify existing
agreements as the voluntary deployment
of ATSC 3.0 becomes more widespread.
We do, however, require that
broadcasters that enter into local
simulcast agreements maintain a written
copy of such agreements and provide
them to the Commission upon request.
2. Definition of Local Simulcasting
a. Programming on the 1.0 and 3.0
Channels
18. We require that, for the time
being, the programming aired on the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel be
‘‘substantially similar’’ to that of the
primary video programming stream on
the ATSC 3.0 channel. We define this
requirement to mean that the
programming on the 1.0 simulcast
channel and the 3.0 primary stream
must be the same, except for
programming features that are based on
the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0,
advertisements, and promotions for
upcoming programs.23 This approach
21 We adopted similar provisions for full power
and Class A television channel sharing
arrangements entered into in conjunction with the
incentive auction and outside the auction context,
and for secondary-secondary CSAs.
22 In addition, the guest station’s companion
channel aired on a partner host station will be
considered part of the guest station’s existing
license and may not be assigned to a third party
separately from the guest station’s license.
23 We also provide an exception for instances
where broadcasters are able to obtain the rights to
air the 1.0 version of a program but not the 3.0
version of that program. In such cases, broadcasters
may air that program on their 1.0 simulcast stream
and a different program on their 3.0 primary stream.
This exception does not appear to significantly
implicate the concern expressed by some that
broadcasters would choose to obtain the rights to
air the 3.0 version of a program and not the 1.0
version of that program so that the most desired
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
Continued
02FER2
5002
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
will help ensure that viewers do not
lose access to the broadcast
programming they receive today, while
still providing flexibility for
broadcasters to innovate and experiment
with new, innovative programming
features using Next Gen TV technology.
The substantially similar requirement
will sunset in five years from its
effective date (i.e., the date it is
published in the Federal Register)
absent further action by the Commission
via rulemaking to extend it.24 While we
conclude that this requirement is
necessary in the early stages of ATSC
3.0 deployment, it could unnecessarily
impede Next Gen TV programming
innovations as the deployment of ATSC
3.0 progresses. We intend to monitor the
ATSC 3.0 marketplace, and will extend
the substantially similar requirement if
necessary.
19. Enhanced Capabilities. We do not
apply the requirement to certain
enhanced capabilities that cannot
reasonably be provided in ATSC 1.0
format.25 These capabilities include
‘‘hyper-localized’’ content (e.g., geotargeted weather, targeted emergency
alerts, and hyper-local news),26
programming features or improvements
created for the 3.0 service (e.g.,
emergency alert ‘‘wake up’’ ability and
interactive programming features),
enhanced formats made possible by 3.0
technology (e.g., 4K or HDR), and any
personalization of programming
performed by the viewer and at the
viewer’s discretion.27 Further, because
ATSC 3.0 technology may enable
broadcasters to provide more tailored
programming could be made available solely on the
3.0 channel. We caution, however, that if this
exception somehow is abused to lead to that
outcome, the Commission will revisit it.
24 Some commenters oppose an automatic sunset
of the substantially similar requirement absent
Commission action, but support Commission
review of this requirement in a future rulemaking.
25 While some of these capabilities may be
theoretically possible within the ATSC 1.0
framework, they are not currently part of the ATSC
1.0 standards, are unlikely to be included in current
consumer equipment, and as such cannot
reasonably be provided via ATSC 1.0.
26 ATSC 3.0 technology permits stations to
simultaneously transmit different content to
viewers. Thus, a station could simultaneously
transmit a Washington, DC-focused news program
to viewers in Washington, DC, a Virginia-focused
news program to viewers in Virginia, and a
Maryland-focused news program to viewers in
Maryland. Viewers may also be able to select which
of the three programs to view. In terms of its ATSC
1.0 simulcast, the station will determine what
programming to air on its ATSC 1.0 programming
stream in these circumstances (i.e., one of the three
programs or a broader newscast that includes
elements of all three).
27 We agree with NAB and ATVA that the local
simulcasting requirement should not apply to
‘‘content transmitted by means other than a realtime ATSC 3.0 broadcast transmission’’ (e.g., a link
to programming available over the internet).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
advertisements or promotions to
individual viewers than ATSC 1.0
technology, we also do not apply the
requirement to advertisements or
promotions for upcoming programming.
20. Time Shifting. We do not consider
programming that airs at a different time
on the 1.0 simulcast channel than on the
3.0 primary channel to be substantially
similar. Our goal in this regard is to
ensure that popular programming
continues to be aired on the 1.0 channel
at the time viewers generally expect it
to be aired.
21. The goal of our local simulcasting
requirement is to preserve a station’s
existing service to viewers. To ensure
that viewers are protected, it is
important not only to require that
television broadcasters continue to
broadcast in the current ATSC 1.0
standard while ATSC 3.0 is being
deployed, but also that they continue to
air in ATSC 1.0 format the programming
that viewers most want and expect to
receive. We seek to ensure that
broadcasters air their most popular,
widely-viewed programming on their
1.0 simulcast channels so that viewers
are not forced to purchase 3.0 capable
equipment simply to continue to receive
this programming rather than because
they find the ATSC 3.0 technology
particularly attractive.
22. We find that our approach
provides both flexibility and clear
guidance to broadcasters regarding their
simulcasting obligation. We also note
that it is consistent with the expectation
expressed by broadcasters that Next Gen
TV signals will contain programming
that is ‘‘substantially the same’’ as the
programming carried on the ATSC 1.0
signal, taking into account the ability to
enhance the 3.0 programming using the
capabilities made possible by the new
television standard.28
23. We decline to adopt requirements
regarding the format of the 1.0 simulcast
signal.29 We recognize that broadcasters
may face spectrum constraints that
could limit their ability to continue to
provide HD programming or other
enhanced formats on their 1.0 simulcast
signals. Because simulcasting
partnerships will require that more
stations share the same amount of
spectrum, stations may have less
capacity for HD programming. Our
28 ONE Media Comments at 9 (‘‘During the
simulcast period, we expect that Next Gen signals
will include programming that is either
substantially the same, or that is comparable to the
programming carried on the ATSC 1.0 signal, taking
into account the ability to enhance that
programming using the 3.0 capabilities.’’).
29 Similarly, we decline to limit ATSC 1.0 host
stations to transmitting only two HD video streams
to avoid affecting the signal quality of the streams.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
existing rules do not require
broadcasters to provide their signals in
HD,30 and we decline to adopt such
rules for purposes of the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0 service.31
24. We recognize that if broadcasters
that currently transmit in HD switch to
standard definition (SD) in order to
deploy ATSC 3.0 service, consumers
may not receive HD signals.32 This
change could affect both OTA viewers
and MVPD subscribers, as MVPDs often
rely on OTA reception of broadcast
signals to retransmit local programming
to their subscribers.33 Nevertheless, we
expect that broadcasters will seek to
provide the highest quality signals
possible while they voluntarily deploy
3.0, as they do today.34 That is, while
we urge broadcasters to continue to
provide high quality/HD service on their
1.0 simulcast channels to the extent
possible, we will rely on broadcasters’
market-based incentives to do so rather
than mandating a specific format for
simulcast channels.35 For the same
30 DTV broadcasters are required only to transmit
in SD.
31 We also decline to require stations to disclose
any planned change in signal quality as part of their
simulcasting application or to permit the
Commission to review and approve such changes,
as advocated by Consumer Advocates. Our rules do
not require HD service and we decline to consider
the provision of such service as part of our review
of simulcasting applications.
32 A number of commenters express concern that
a broadcaster serving as a host for the ATSC 1.0
simulcasts of other stations will degrade the HD
quality of these streams as compared to their
current HD programming, or no longer provide HD
service at all on the 1.0 simulcasts, in order to
minimize the bandwidth the host station must
devote to simulcast signals and thereby maximize
available space for other broadcast streams. Some
commenters also express concern that broadcasters
may deliberately degrade ATSC 1.0 signal quality
in order to ‘‘encourage’’ ATSC 3.0 adoption.
33 According to ATVA, many of its members rely
on OTA delivery of broadcast signals for more than
half of the stations they retransmit and all of its
members rely on OTA delivery as a backup to their
other method of receiving the signals they
retransmit. Small rural MVPDs are more likely to
rely exclusively on OTA delivery of TV signals.
While MVPDs that rely on OTA delivery could
mitigate signal quality issues by obtaining delivery
through alternate means, such as fiber, DBS
transport, or reception and transcoding/down
conversion of the ATSC 3.0 signal, such methods
may require significant expenditures that small
MVPDs in particular are less able to afford. In
addition, even if an ATSC 3.0 signal could be
received OTA at the MVPD headend, the equipment
necessary to receive that signal off-air and to
transcode/down convert it is not yet commercially
available.
34 Most broadcasters who address this issue argue
that mandating a specific format for the 1.0 or 3.0
streams during the voluntary deployment of ATSC
3.0 would hamper the deployment of 3.0 service.
35 Pearl states that ‘‘its members intend to keep
their primary ATSC 1.0 signal in high definition
during the transition’’ because ‘‘consumers expect
this programming to be in high definition’’ and
‘‘network affiliation agreements as well as other
programming agreements generally require network
programming to be transmitted in HD.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
reasons, we also decline to require
broadcasters that choose to convert their
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal from HD to
SD, or otherwise change the quality of
the signal, to deliver a higher resolution
signal to MVPDs.36
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
b. Coverage Requirements for the ATSC
1.0 Simulcast Signal
25. We next address the required
coverage area for Next Gen TV stations
that relocate their 1.0 simulcast signal to
a temporary host station (and convert
their existing facilities to ATSC 3.0). In
particular, we address the extent to
which the coverage area of the new 1.0
simulcast signal must overlap with the
station’s existing ATSC 1.0 coverage
area. For full power broadcasters
implementing Next Gen TV service in
this manner, we require that the
station’s 1.0 simulcast channel retain
and continue to cover the station’s
community of license and that it be
assigned to the same DMA as the
originating station.37 In addition, in
evaluating applications filed by stations
seeking to air their ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signal on a partner host station, we will
consider any loss in signal coverage
resulting from the simulcast
arrangement in determining whether to
grant the application. We will consider
more favorably simulcast arrangements
with a service loss of no more than five
percent of the population served by the
station and will provide expedited
processing of such applications.
26. This coverage requirement is
consistent with our goal to minimize
disruption to viewers as a result of the
voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0. If a
station moves its ATSC 1.0 signal to a
simulcast host station with a different
transmitter location, existing OTA
viewers may no longer be able to receive
the signal. In addition, MVPDs that lose
OTA reception of the signal at their
local headend may no longer be able to
carry the station. By requiring stations
to continue to provide an ATSC 1.0
signal that covers their current
community of license and encouraging
them to keep coverage loss to five
percent or less of the population
currently receiving a 1.0 signal over the
36 ATVA argues that the Commission should not
rely on marketplace incentives because broadcasters
might have competing economic incentives to take
steps to try to drive consumers to buy new
equipment for ATSC 3.0, including by degrading
ATSC 1.0 signals. In light of broadcasters’
representations that they will not take such action,
and in the absence of any reliable record evidence
to suggest that broadcasters are likely to behave in
this manner, we decline to adopt additional
restrictions, as requested by ATVA.
37 We will consider stations that are not assigned
to a DMA by Nielsen to be assigned to the DMA
in which they are located.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
air, we will limit the number of current
viewers and MVPD headends that will
lose access to the OTA 1.0 signal as a
result of local simulcasting. Although
we agree that broadcasters have a
market incentive to continue to reach
their viewers during the implementation
of ATSC 3.0 service, we do not believe
it is appropriate to rely solely on market
incentives when it comes to the
selection of 1.0 simulcast partners given
the potential impact of service loss on
OTA viewers as well as MVPDs. We also
decline to permit Next Gen TV stations
to arrange for the simulcast of their
ATSC 1.0 signal on another broadcast
facility ‘‘serving a substantially similar
community of license,’’ as proposed by
Petitioners, as that standard would
appear to permit a station to temporarily
cease providing 1.0 service to its own
community of license and could result
in a significant reduction or change in
the station’s coverage area.
27. Signal Relocation. Full power
broadcasters implementing 3.0 service
must continue to provide 1.0 service to
the station’s existing community of
license and comply with our
community of license signal
requirement. A full power Next Gen TV
station that seeks to move its 1.0 signal
to a temporary simulcast host must
choose a simulcast partner from whose
transmitter site the Next Gen TV
broadcaster will continue to meet the
community of license signal
requirement over its current community
of license.38 This approach ensures that
full power Next Gen TV broadcasters
continue to provide 1.0 service to the
local community they were licensed to
serve, consistent with the goals
underlying Section 307(b) of the
Communications Act to ensure the
provision of service to local
communities.
28. Class A, LPTV, and TV translator
stations do not have a community of
license signal requirement. For Class A
stations that propose to broadcast their
ATSC 1.0 signal from a temporary host
facility, we will apply the existing 30mile and contour overlap restrictions
that apply to low power station moves.
Thus, a Class A station that proposes to
move its 1.0 signal in order to
implement 3.0 service: (1) Must
maintain overlap between the protected
contour of its existing and proposed 1.0
signal; and (2) may not relocate its 1.0
simulcast signal more than
30 miles from the reference coordinates
38 Under the Commission’s rules, a full power
television station must locate its transmitter at a site
from which it can place a principal community
contour over its entire community of license.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5003
of the relocating station’s antenna
location.
29. As discussed below, we exempt
LPTV and TV translator stations from
our local simulcasting requirement and
permit them to transition directly from
ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 service. If an
LPTV or TV translator station elects
voluntarily to simulcast, however, and
to move its 1.0 signal to a temporary
simulcast host in order to implement 3.0
service on its existing facilities, we
require that the station comply with the
restrictions we adopt above with respect
to such moves by a Class A station.39
This approach is consistent with the
goal of our local simulcasting
requirement to protect existing viewers.
We also note that LPTV and TV
translator stations that elect to simulcast
will benefit from the licensed simulcast
approach we adopt herein that will, for
example, permit them to partner with an
NCE host station.40 Thus, we conclude
that these stations should meet the same
coverage requirements with respect to
their ATSC 1.0 signal as other low
power stations if they elect to simulcast
and to move their 1.0 signal as part of
a local simulcasting arrangement.
30. Expedited Processing. We provide
expedited processing to full power,
Class A, LPTV, and TV translator
applications if the 1.0 simulcast signal
broadcast at the temporary host facility
will serve at least 95 percent of the
predicted population served by the
originating station’s 1.0 signal. The
Commission has used a 95 percent
population coverage threshold for
purposes of expedited processing of
applications both in the context of the
DTV transition and the incentive
auction repacking process, and we
conclude that it is appropriate to adopt
the same standard here.41 We anticipate
39 We also require that an LPTV or TV translator
station that elects to simulcast comply with the
other simulcasting requirements we adopt herein,
including the substantially similar programming
requirement.
40 We note that an LPTV or TV translator station
could alternatively choose to enter into a
multicasting arrangement with a commercial host
station rather than seeking a license to simulcast.
41 The Commission used a 95% population
coverage threshold in the context of the DTV
transition for purposes of providing expedited
processing to applications for construction of
facilities on broadcasters’ final, post-DTV transition
channels. In addition, in the post-incentive auction
repack the Commission provided expedited
processing to applications for authorization for
repacked facilities that, inter alia, are no more than
five percent smaller than those specified in the
Channel Reassignment PN with respect to predicted
population served. Just because an application
qualifies for expedited processing does not
necessarily mean that the application will be
granted. Applications that receive expedited review
but that are not readily grantable by the
Commission may require further action by the
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
Continued
02FER2
5004
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
that the Media Bureau generally will be
able to process applications qualifying
for expedited processing within 15
business days after public notice of the
filing of such applications. Applications
that do not qualify for expedited
processing will be considered on a caseby-case basis. We expect generally to
process applications that do not qualify
for expedited processing within 60
business days after we give notice of the
filing of the application in the Daily
Digest. In addition to information
regarding any population that will lose
1.0 service as a result of the simulcast
arrangement, such applications must
contain the following information: (1)
Whether there is another possible
simulcast partner(s) in the market that
would result in less 1.0 service loss to
existing viewers and, if so, why the Next
Gen TV broadcaster chose to partner
with a station creating a larger service
loss; (2) what steps, if any, the station
plans to take to minimize the impact of
the 1.0 service loss (e.g., providing
ATSC 3.0 dongles, set-top boxes, or
gateway devices to viewers in the loss
area); and (3) the public interest benefits
of the simulcast arrangement and a
showing of why the station believes the
benefit(s) of granting the application
outweigh the harm(s).
31. Our approach appropriately
balances the need to ensure continued
provision of service to viewers while
broadcasters voluntarily deploy ATSC
3.0 and permitting broadcasters
sufficient flexibility to locate and select
a simulcast partner. We believe that the
vast majority of broadcasters in today’s
market should be able to find a
simulcast partner that would enable
them to qualify for expedited processing
under this approach.42 In markets where
station. We disagree with NAB that expedited
processing should apply if a 1.0 simulcast signal
aired on a host station covers the originating
station’s community of license, without reference to
loss of predicted population served by the 1.0
signal. NAB claims that such an approach ‘‘mirrors
the coverage area standard the Commission used
during the DTV transition.’’ We agree with NCTA
that NAB’s analogy to the DTV transition is inapt.
While the Commission permitted stations to
construct initial DTV facilities that served only
their community of license, that decision was
temporary and was accompanied by a ‘‘use-or-lose’’
deadline for their final DTV facilities by which
broadcasters were required either to replicate their
analog coverage or lose DTV service protection to
any unreplicated areas. Moreover, because viewers
continued to receive analog service until the end of
the DTV transition, the initial DTV build-out
requirement to which NAB refers was not essential
to preserve existing service to viewers. To ensure
that existing viewers will continue to receive 1.0
service, the Commission is using the same
processing standard for 1.0 simulcast signals that it
used for final DTV facilities, not the standard used
in the initial DTV build-out.
42 Commission staff estimates that about 95% of
full power stations are in a market where there is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
it may not be possible for a station
seeking to implement ATSC 3.0 service
to find a 1.0 simulcast partner that
would meet the test for expedited
processing, the Next Gen TV broadcaster
could seek regular (versus expedited)
Commission approval of its
simulcasting arrangement with the
required additional showings, or seek a
waiver of the simulcasting requirement.
Broadcasters also have the option to
continue to provide 1.0 service on their
existing facility while implementing 3.0
service on another station.43
32. For stations electing to move their
1.0 simulcast channel to a temporary
host station, we decline to limit service
loss to only 0.5 percent of the station’s
predicted population served, absent a
waiver, as advocated by some
commenters. In the context of the
incentive auction, the Commission
determined that no individual station
reassignment made by the Commission
pursuant to the repacking process
would be permitted to reduce another
station’s population by more than 0.5
percent. This standard was chosen to
implement a statutory requirement to
‘‘make all reasonable efforts’’ to preserve
a station’s population served during the
repacking process. We find that a
somewhat less strict standard, that
restricts population loss to five percent
absent a showing that a greater loss is
warranted, is appropriate to permit
broadcasters sufficient flexibility to
locate a simulcast partner while also
at least one other station in the market that could
serve as a simulcast host station that would meet
our community of license coverage requirement,
and that 75% of such stations are in markets where
they would have at least four other stations that
could serve as a potential simulcast host station
under this requirement. In addition, approximately
80% of full power and Class A stations are in
markets where there is at least one other station that
could serve as a simulcast host that would qualify
under our expedited processing standard. We also
note that ONE Media ‘‘expect[s] the instances in
which simulcasting is not feasible to be the rare
exception.’’ ONE Media attached a list of television
markets that will have either one, two, or three
stations (after accounting for stations cleared in the
incentive auction).
For purposes of the community of license
analysis, the staff did a pairwise study of the
contours for all full-power and Class A stations,
based on data from TVStudy, to count, for each
station, the number of other stations’ contours that
contained a potential guest’s community of license.
For the expedited processing analysis, the staff
looked at the service of all full-power and Class A
stations, based on data from TVStudy, and did a
pairwise study to count, for each station, the
population of cells that are served by both the
potential host station and the potential guest and
compared that to the total population served by the
potential guest.
43 LPTV and TV translator stations also have the
option to transition directly to ATSC 3.0 without
simulcasting.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
protecting viewers from undue service
disruption.44
33. We also decline to require a
station to demonstrate that it has made
‘‘reasonable efforts’’ to continue to air
its ATSC 1.0 signal from its existing
facility before permitting the station to
simulcast that signal from a temporary
host facility. Next Gen TV broadcasters
have a market-based incentive to
continue to serve their existing viewers,
and the requirements we adopt herein
provide additional incentives and
protections to ensure continuity of
service when possible. Our approach
appropriately balances our goal of
protecting existing viewers with the
need to provide Next Gen TV
broadcasters with flexibility to manage
their deployment of ATSC 3.0 based on
their station’s and market’s unique
circumstances.
34. In addition, we decline to require
that stations that transmit their ATSC
simulcast 1.0 signal from a new host
facility reach the headends of all
MVPDs that rely on OTA delivery or to
reimburse MVPDs for the costs
associated with reception and
processing of an ATSC 1.0 signal
delivered from a new location.45 We
note that our ATSC 1.0 simulcast
coverage requirement will help MVPDs
that rely on OTA reception of TV
signals, including many rural small
MVPDs,46 by encouraging stations to
maintain ATSC 1.0 signal coverage to
most of their existing service contour,
thus helping to ensure that these signals
continue to reach an MVPD’s headend
or local receive facility. The
Communications Act requires mustcarry stations to assume responsibility
44 We decline to adopt a rebuttable presumption
that broadcasters that do not meet the 95% standard
will have their simulcast applications denied by the
Commission, as advocated by Consumer Advocates.
We believe that this proposal would unduly restrict
broadcasters’ flexibility to find simulcast partners.
As noted above, applicants that do not satisfy the
95% standard will be required to make a more
detailed showing regarding their proposed
simulcasting partnership than those that do meet
the standard, and we conclude that this showing
will enable Commission staff to adequately analyze
these applications.
45 These costs include the cost to deliver a signal
by alternate means, such as fiber, as well as the cost
of new receivers and antennas. If a Next Gen TV
broadcaster changes to a new 1.0 simulcast host
station, MVPDs could incur some of these costs
more than once.
46 According to ACA, small MVPDs, which are
more likely to rely exclusively on OTA delivery of
TV signals, are often located in rural areas on the
edges of an existing service contour and are thus
more likely to lose service. ACA Comments at 8. In
addition, these MVPDs are less able to mitigate
costs through fiber delivery than their small urban
counterparts as they are less likely to be located in
areas with existing fiber providers and thus more
likely to require deployment of a more-expensive
dedicated fiber strand or entire cable.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
for delivery of a good-quality signal to
MVPDs and, for retransmission consent
stations, leaves allocation of
responsibility to the parties. As
discussed below, we decline to adopt
rules at this time that alter the allocation
of financial responsibility during
retransmission consent negotiations for
purposes of the voluntary deployment
of ATSC 3.0.
c. Coverage Requirements for ATSC 3.0
Simulcast Signal
35. We provide more location and
coverage flexibility to Next Gen TV
broadcasters that elect to continue
broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 from their
existing transmitter location 47 and
transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal from a
temporary host location.48 We will
permit such broadcasters to establish 3.0
service anywhere within the same DMA
as the broadcaster’s existing station. We
also will not consider the extent to
which the population served by such
stations overlaps with the population
served by the existing ATSC 1.0
station.49 By providing more latitude for
the location of the 3.0 signal, we hope
to encourage Next Gen TV broadcasters
to initiate 3.0 service on another facility
initially while maintaining their 1.0
signal at the station’s existing location,
when possible, thereby avoiding
disruption to viewers and MVPDs. We
accord this flexibility in order to
facilitate the implementation of ATSC
3.0 and because we are less concerned
about the provision of Next Gen TV 3.0
service to a station’s existing viewers,
particularly early in the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0, than we are
with preserving ATSC 1.0 service to
those viewers.
d. Simulcast Exceptions for LPTV and
TV Translator Stations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
36. We exempt LPTV and TV
translator stations from our local
simulcasting requirement and allow
these stations to elect to transition
directly to 3.0 service. LPTV and TV
translator stations electing to transition
directly must first file an application to
convert their facilities to 3.0 operation.
In addition, they must comply with the
47 By existing transmitter location, we mean a
station’s licensed transmitter site immediately prior
to either implementation of ATSC 3.0 service or
initiation of an ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal on a
partner simulcast host station.
48 A Next Gen TV broadcaster that converts to
ATSC 3.0 operation on their existing facility must
provide 3.0 service to their existing service area.
49 We do not establish a separate community of
license or coverage requirement for 3.0 ‘‘guest’’
signals because these broadcasters will continue to
provide ATSC 1.0 service to their existing
community of license.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
MVPD notification and consumer
education requirements adopted herein.
37. We adopt this simulcast exception
for LPTV and TV translator stations in
recognition of the fact that they face
unique challenges in locating a
simulcast partner. As a practical matter,
many are not located near another LPTV
or TV translator station and they may
not be attractive simulcast partners for
full power stations because of their
lower power and coverage area. In
addition, because LPTV and TV
translator stations are secondary, they
are subject to displacement by primary
full power and Class A stations, further
reducing their desirability as partner
host stations. Absent an exemption from
our local simulcasting requirement,
LPTV and TV translator stations could
be denied the opportunity to implement
ATSC 3.0 service until the Commission
eliminates the simulcast requirement.50
38. We recognize that permitting
LPTV and TV translator stations to
transition directly to ATSC 3.0 could
deprive those OTA viewers without
ATSC 3.0 TV sets or converter
equipment of the important
programming these stations provide.
MVPD subscribers could also be affected
if MVPDs are not prepared to carry
ATSC 3.0 signals on the date of a direct
transition. Although we recognize that
permitting LPTV and TV translator
stations to transition directly may cause
some consumer disruption, in light of
the unique circumstances faced by
LPTV and TV translator stations we
conclude that providing these stations
with the option to transition directly
will best ensure that they are able to
deploy ATSC 3.0 technology.
39. Exempting LPTV and TV
translator stations from the local
simulcasting requirement will have the
added benefit of allowing these stations
to serve as ‘‘lighthouse’’ stations,
thereby providing an ATSC 3.0 host
option for other full power, Class A,
LPTV, and TV translator stations that
wish to partner with them.51 LPTV
stations could, therefore, serve an
important role in market-wide simulcast
arrangements by permitting other
stations to experiment with 3.0 service
while maintaining ATSC 1.0 service on
their existing facility. As noted above,
our goal is to encourage Next Gen TV
broadcasters to initiate 3.0 service on
another facility initially while
maintaining their 1.0 simulcast signal at
the station’s existing location, when
50 Other commenters oppose permitting LPTV
stations to transition directly to ATSC 3.0.
51 A full power station airing a channel on a
partner LPTV host station would be limited to the
LPTV reduced power level on that channel and
would lose its primary interference protections.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5005
possible, to help avoid disruption to
viewers and MVPDs. LPTV stations that
elect to transition directly and to serve
as ATSC 3.0 host stations could thus
play a significant role in facilitating the
conversion to 3.0 technology.52 While
viewers without ATSC 3.0-capable
equipment would lose access to LPTV
and TV translator stations that elect to
transition directly, these stations may
also provide innovative 3.0
programming that could help drive
consumer adoption of such equipment.
Thus, on balance, we believe that the
benefit of permitting these stations to
transition directly outweighs the
potential harm.
40. Finally, our decision to exempt
LPTV and TV translator stations from
our local simulcasting requirement will
ensure that analog LPTV and TV
translator stations and stations that have
been displaced due to the post-incentive
auction repacking process are not forced
to build both an ATSC 1.0 and an ATSC
3.0 facility. The Commission has
determined that LPTV and TV translator
stations must complete their transition
to digital service by July 13, 2021.53 The
Commission previously changed this
deadline to ensure that analog LPTV
and TV translator stations would not be
forced to complete their digital
conversion only to find that their newly
constructed digital facilities were
displaced as a result of the incentive
auction repacking process, thus
necessitating a significant additional
expenditure to locate a new channel and
modify their digital facilities
accordingly.54 Many digital LPTV
stations will also be required to seek
new channels and construct new
facilities as a result of the incentive
auction. By exempting LPTV and TV
translator stations from the simulcasting
requirement, we similarly avoid forcing
52 NAB does not object to permitting LPTV
stations to transition directly to ATSC 3.0 and
agrees that these stations can serve an important
role in the deployment of Next Gen TV.
53 In 2015, the Commission extended the deadline
for analog LPTV and TV translator stations to
complete their transition to digital service.
Specifically, the Commission set a digital transition
date for analog LPTV and TV translator stations of
12 months after the completion of the 39-month
Post-Auction Transition Period (the 39-month
period during which full power and Class A
stations assigned to new channels in the Incentive
Auction repacking process will transition to their
new channels). The Commission has determined
that the 39-month Post-Auction Transition Period
will end on July 13, 2020. Accordingly, the
deadline for analog LPTV and TV translator stations
to transition to digital technology is July 13, 2021.
54 Absent a change in the deadline to complete
construction of their digital facilities, LPTV and TV
translator stations displaced in the repacking
process would have been required to find a new
channel and modify their new digital facilities or
cease operations if they were unable to find a new
channel.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5006
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
these stations to make significant
expenditures in new ATSC 1.0 facilities
by July 13, 2021 only later to be faced
with a further expenditure of resources
if the station chooses to convert those
facilities to ATSC 3.0.55
41. We decline to restrict the ability
of LPTV and TV translator stations
affiliated with a broadcast network to
directly transition, as advocated by
ATVA.56 We are not persuaded that
there is any reasoned basis to give
network affiliated stations less
flexibility than other secondary stations
in this respect.57 These stations may
face the same challenges finding a
simulcast partner as other LPTV and TV
translator stations, and we believe they
should have the same opportunity to
serve as potential ATSC 3.0
‘‘lighthouse’’ stations.58 We note that we
are affording LPTV and TV translator
stations with the opportunity to
transition directly, but are not requiring
them to do so.59 Thus, any LPTV or TV
translator station that wishes to deploy
ATSC 3.0 service may elect to air both
an ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 stream by
partnering with another station rather
than transitioning directly. Stations that
transition directly could also consider
taking steps to minimize the disruption
to viewers, such as offering free
converter devices (e.g., an external tuner
dongle, set-top box, or gateway device)
that enable ATSC 1.0-only receivers to
be upgraded to receive ATSC 3.0
transmissions. LPTV and TV translator
stations that elect voluntarily to
simulcast must comply with the
simulcasting requirements we adopt
herein, including the substantially
similar programming requirement and
the coverage requirements related to
ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 signals. Applying
these requirements to LPTV and TV
translator stations that simulcast is
consistent with the goal of our
55 The LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition supports
permitting newly authorized LPTV stations not yet
constructed to transition directly to ATSC 3.0.
56 ATVA states, however, that it ‘‘takes no
position’’ on whether a simulcasting requirement
should apply to LPTV stations that are not carried
by any MVPD, not required to be carried by any
MVPD under the must-carry statute, and remain
unaffiliated with any network. ATVA later
expressed the view that any exemption from the
simulcast requirement should be limited to stations
other than the top-six rated stations.
57 A Commission staff analysis of SNL Kagan data
as of Apr. 15, 2017 shows that 42 of 258 LPTV
stations are affiliated with a top-four broadcast
network (ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox).
58 Network affiliates may also have contractual
obligations that limit their ability to transition
directly.
59 We agree with ATVA that LPTV and TV
translator stations should have the opportunity to
convert to ATSC 3.0 and arrange for the simulcast
of their ATSC 1.0 signal on a partner simulcast host
station.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
simulcasting requirement to protect
existing viewers and is appropriate in
light of the benefits these stations will
receive as a result of their simulcast
license.
e. Waiver of the Simulcasting and Local
Coverage Requirements
42. We will consider requests for
waiver of our local simulcasting and
coverage requirements on a case-by-case
basis. This includes requests from full
power and Class A television stations to
transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to
ATSC 3.0 service on the station’s
existing facility without providing a 1.0
simulcast as well as requests to air a 1.0
simulcast channel from a host location
that does not cover all or a portion of
the station’s community of license or
from which the station can provide only
a lower signal threshold over the
community than that required by the
rules.60 We are inclined to consider
favorably requests for waiver where the
Next Gen TV station can demonstrate
that it has no viable local simulcasting
partner in its market and where the
station agrees to make reasonable efforts
to preserve 1.0 service to existing
viewers in its community of license
and/or otherwise minimize the impact
on such viewers (for example, by
providing free or low cost ATSC 3.0
converters to viewers). In the Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we
sought further comment on two issues
related to waivers and exceptions: (1)
Whether to provide further guidance on
how we will evaluate requests for
waiver of the local simulcasting
requirement; and (2) whether we should
exempt NCE and/or Class A stations (as
a class) from our local simulcasting
requirement or adopt a presumptive
waiver standard for such stations.
43. Commenters, including both
broadcasters and MVPDs, support
waivers of the simulcasting requirement
for broadcasters that are unable to enter
into simulcasting arrangements. We are
aware that some full power and Class A
stations may face a unique challenge in
meeting our local simulcasting
requirement. For example, PTV notes
that public television stations are often
not sited based on DMA boundaries
because many statewide networks
60 The Commission may waive its rules if good
cause is shown. We are not inclined to consider
favorably requests to change community of license
solely to enable simulcasting. We will, however,
consider a waiver if necessary for a station to
comply with the local simulcasting requirement,
based on the facts presented. We note that the
required showing to justify waiver of the
community of license coverage requirement is
different from the showing required by simulcast
license applicants that do not qualify for expedited
processing, discussed above.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
licensed to state agencies or
commissions are required to serve their
entire state regardless of cross-state
DMA boundaries. As a result, certain
public stations may find it difficult to
find a simulcast partner. Other stations
in small markets and/or rural areas may
face similar challenges in meeting our
simulcasting requirement.61 We also
recognize that, as the implementation of
Next Gen TV progresses and more
stations convert to ATSC 3.0, it may
become increasingly difficult for
broadcasters to find suitable partners for
local simulcasting. Our waiver standard
is intended to facilitate the provision of
a waiver in these circumstances to
ensure that all stations have the
opportunity to participate in the
voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0.
3. Licensing Issues
a. Licensed Simulcast Approach
44. We require that 1.0 and 3.0
channels aired on a partner host station
be licensed as temporary second
channels of the originating broadcaster.
That is, the ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0
signals of a Next Gen TV broadcaster
will be two separately authorized
companion channels under the
broadcaster’s single, unified license.62
Next Gen TV broadcasters will be
required to file an application and
obtain Commission approval before a
1.0 simulcast channel or a 3.0 channel
aired on a partner host station can go on
the air, and before an existing 1.0 station
can convert to 3.0 operation or back to
1.0 operation. However, as discussed
further below, we adopt a streamlined
‘‘one-step’’ process for reviewing and
approving such applications to
minimize the burden on both Next Gen
TV broadcasters and the Commission.63
45. The partner host and guest
station(s) in a simulcast arrangement
will continue to be licensed separately
and each station will have its own call
sign. Each licensee will be
independently subject to all of the
Commission’s obligations, rules, and
policies. The Commission retains the
61 Single-station markets present the most obvious
example of situations in which simulcasting may
not be possible.
62 The companion channel aired on a partner host
station will be considered part of the guest station’s
license and may not be separately assigned to a
third party.
63 Normally, licensing is a two-step process. A
broadcaster must first file an application for a
construction permit (CP) and obtain approval from
the Commission for the CP and then, once
construction is complete, file an application for a
license to cover the CP and wait for Commission
approval of the license to cover. We will process
applications seeking changes to facilities and
licenses that require the filing of a construction
permit pursuant to our existing processes.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
right to enforce any violation of these
requirements against one, more than
one, or all parties to a simulcast
agreement. As is always the case, the
Commission would take into account all
relevant facts and circumstances in any
enforcement action, including the
relevant contractual obligations of the
parties involved.
46. We sought comment in the Next
Gen TV NPRM on whether simulcasts
should be separately licensed as second
channels of the originating station or
treated as multicast streams of the host
station.64 We conclude that a licensed
simulcast approach is preferable to a
multicast approach for several reasons.
First, it will allow NCE stations to serve
as hosts to commercial stations’
simulcast programming. Section 399B of
the Communications Act provides that
‘‘[n]o public broadcast station may make
its facilities available to any person for
the broadcasting of any
advertisement.’’ 65 Under a multicast
approach, an NCE station would be
prohibited from hosting the simulcast
programming of a commercial station on
a multicast stream because the stream
would be aired on the ‘‘facilities’’ of the
NCE licensee. Under the licensed
simulcast approach we adopt herein,
however, the ‘‘facilities’’ are no longer
exclusively the facilities of the NCE
station, as each station has a right to use
the facilities pursuant to its separate
license and contractual rights. A
commercial stream aired on a partner
NCE station will be separately licensed
and authorized to use the host’s
channel, therefore permitting an NCE
station to serve as a host to a
commercial stream.
47. Second, the licensed simulcast
approach clarifies the carriage rights of
simulcast signals. Because multicast
signals are not entitled to carriage rights,
treating simulcast signals as multicast
channels under a host’s license raises
the question as to whether such signals
have mandatory carriage rights. As
discussed below, a Next Gen TV
broadcaster’s licensed ATSC 1.0 signal
will be entitled to carriage whether
aired on the Next Gen TV broadcaster’s
own facility or that of a simulcast host.
64 As proposed in the NPRM, we establish a new
service group code of NGDTV in LMS to signify the
various classes of ATSC 3.0 stations, including
NGDTV for full-service 3.0, NGDTS for DTS/SFN
3.0, NGLPT for low-power translator 3.0 stations,
NGDCA for Class A, and NGLPD for low-power 3.0
stations. This means 3.0 channels will receive a ‘‘–
NG’’ suffix to their call signs (e.g., WZYX–NG’’) to
contrast to their 1.0 simulcast channels which will
keep their suffixes.
65 The Act defines an advertisement as ‘‘any
message or other programming material which is
broadcast or otherwise transmitted in exchange for
any remuneration. . . .’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
48. Third, the licensed simulcast
approach makes it clear that the
originating station (and not the host) is
responsible for regulatory compliance
regarding its 1.0 simulcast or 3.0 signal
being aired on a host station and gives
the Commission clear enforcement
authority over the originating station in
the event of a violation of our rules.
b. Licensing Procedure
49. We require that a Next Gen TV
broadcaster file an application with the
Commission, and receive approval,
before: (1) Moving its 1.0 signal to a
temporary simulcast host station or
moving its 1.0 simulcast to a different
host station, or discontinuing a 1.0 guest
signal; (2) commencing the airing of a
3.0 channel on a 3.0 host station (that
has already converted to 3.0 operation),
moving its 3.0 channel to a different
host station, or discontinuing a 3.0 guest
signal; or (3) converting its existing
station to 3.0 operation or from 3.0 back
to 1.0. For all of these applications, we
adopt a streamlined one-step process
that will require the filing of only an
application for modification of license
(i.e., without first filing an application
for a construction permit), provided no
other changes are being requested in the
application that would require the filing
of an application for a construction
permit under the Commission’s rules.66
A broadcaster seeking to air a 1.0 signal
on a simulcast host station or to air a 3.0
signal on a host station is required to
file the appropriate license schedule to
FCC Form 2100 identifying, among
other information, the station serving as
the host and the technical facilities of
the host station. Where the broadcaster
seeks to air its 1.0 signal on a simulcast
host station, the broadcaster must also
indicate on the application (1) the
predicted population within the noise
limited service contour served by the
station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal, (2)
the predicted population within the
noise limited service contour served by
the station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal
that will lose the station’s ATSC 1.0
66 In all other circumstances, a broadcaster must
continue to follow existing Commission processes
and rules for modifying their existing facility
through the filing of a construction permit
application followed by an application for license
to cover. (identifying the changes to full power and
Class A television station facilities that require the
filing of a construction permit) and 74.751
(identifying the changes to LPTV and TV translator
stations that require the filing of a construction
permit application). Broadcasters must also
continue to notify the Commission of modifications
to their facilities that do not require the filing of a
construction permit as otherwise required by the
rules. By technical or facility changes, we are
referring only to changes that are regulated by the
Commission and not to other changes (i.e.,
software) that are not regulated by the Commission.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5007
service as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas
of service loss by providing a contour
overlap map,67 and (3) whether the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal aired on the
host station will serve at least 95
percent of the predicted population
within the noise limited service contour
served by the station’s original ATSC
1.0 signal (that is, whether the
application qualifies as a ‘‘checklist’’
application eligible for expedited
processing). Alternatively, where a Next
Gen TV broadcaster seeks to air a 3.0
signal on a partner host station, the
broadcaster must indicate in the
application the DMA of the originating
broadcaster’s facility and the DMA of
the host station. The host station does
not need to take action in connection
with these applications if no technical
changes are necessary to its facilities.68
We anticipate that in most, if not all,
cases, no such changes will be required.
50. While a full power station seeking
to change its channel normally must
first submit a petition to amend the DTV
Table of Allotments, as we proposed in
the Next Gen TV NPRM we do not apply
this process in the context of licensed
simulcasting. We conclude that
amendments to the DTV table are not
required for these channel changes as
they are temporary and because stations
may change locations and hosts
multiple times while local simulcasting
is required.
51. A broadcaster seeking to convert
its existing station to 3.0 transmissions
is required to file the appropriate
license schedule to FCC Form 2100 and,
absent a waiver of the local simulcasting
requirement, simultaneously file on the
appropriate license schedule to FCC
Form 2100 an application to move its
1.0 signal to a simulcast host station.
Absent a waiver, these broadcasters may
not commence 3.0 operation on their
existing facility before their 1.0
simulcast begins airing on the simulcast
host station. If a broadcaster seeks to
move its 3.0 or 1.0 simulcast signal to
a different host station, it is required to
file the appropriate license schedule to
FCC Form 2100 and wait until it
receives Commission approval of the
application before airing the signal on
the new host facility.
52. The Commission will act on all
applications as quickly as possible.
67 We therefore agree with ACA that stations must
include with their applications a contour overlap
map identifying the areas of service loss.
68 A host station must first make any necessary
changes to its facilities before a guest station may
file an application to air an ATSC 1.0 or 3.0 signal
on the host. The Commission will include a note
on the host station’s license identifying any ‘‘guest’’
ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 streams being transmitted on
the station.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5008
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Applications will appear on the Media
Bureau’s Broadcast Applications Public
Notice, which appears every day in the
Daily Digest.69 Grant of an application
will also appear in the Daily Digest. We
expect generally to process applications
that qualify for expedited processing
within 15 business days after we give
notice of the filing of the application in
the Daily Digest and within 60 business
days after we give notice of the filing of
the application in the Daily Digest for
applications that do not qualify for
expedited processing. A station may
commence operations pursuant to its
simulcast agreement only after grant of
the necessary applications and
consistent with any other restrictions
placed on stations by the Commission.70
53. We will treat applications filed to
implement simulcasting and the
conversion of a station to ATSC 3.0
operation as applications for
modification of license. While a change
in channel is normally a major change
under our rules, we conclude that it is
appropriate to treat channel changes
made to comply with the local
simulcasting requirement as minor
changes to a license because the guest
will be assuming the authorized
technical facilities of the host station,
meaning that compliance with our
interference and other technical rules
would have been addressed in licensing
the host station.71 It also is appropriate
to dispense with the requirement that
broadcasters file an application for a
construction permit in connection with
ATSC 3.0 deployment-related changes
that do not involve a change in the
station’s facilities that normally requires
prior Commission approval 72 because
simulcast arrangements will be
temporary and may change over time as
more stations convert to 3.0
technology.73 In addition, we find that
the streamlined one-step licensing
process we adopt herein is warranted
where approval is sought to air a 1.0 or
3.0 signal on an existing host facility
operating at established parameters.
69 Informal objections may be filed with respect
to such applications.
70 Stations will not be permitted to commence
ATSC 3.0 or ATSC 1.0 simulcast (on a simulcast
host facility) operations pursuant to automatic
program test authority.
71 We proposed to treat such channel changes as
minor modifications in the Next Gen TV NPRM.
72 While we proposed to require applicants to file
a construction permit, we adopt a different
approach for the reasons set forth above. In
addition, while the Commission required stations
seeking to channel share to apply for a construction
permit, we conclude a more streamlined process is
appropriate with respect to simulcasting
arrangements because they are temporary.
73 For example, stations may move from one 1.0
simulcast host to another as more stations in the
market convert to 3.0 operations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
Similarly, a streamlined process is
appropriate for use in connection with
a station converting from 1.0 to 3.0
operation where no technical changes
requiring Commission approval to an
existing, licensed facility are required.74
54. This one-step process is only
slightly more burdensome for
broadcasters than the simple
notification procedure, with no
Commission approval required,
supported by several broadcast
commenters. These commenters
advocate that broadcasters simply notify
the Commission of the station’s
simulcasting plans, either via a letter or
on a form provided by the Commission.
We believe that submission of an
application followed by Commission
review and approval is necessary to
ensure compliance with Section 308 of
the Communications Act and the local
simulcasting and other requirements we
adopt herein. Our streamlined one-step
process provides sufficient flexibility to
broadcasters that may need to modify
their simulcasting arrangements as the
deployment of ATSC 3.0 progresses.
Finally, as noted above, while we
require that broadcasters provide their
simulcast agreements to the
Commission upon request, we do not
require them to be filed with their
simulcast applications, thus further
simplifying the application process. We
delegate authority to the Media Bureau
for the narrow purpose of amending
FCC Form 2100 as necessary to
implement the licensing process
adopted herein.
55. In the event a station must make
changes that require prior Commission
approval as part of the deployment of
ATSC 3.0 (i.e., to convert a station from
1.0 to 3.0 technology or back to 1.0, to
enable a station to serve as a host for a
1.0 simulcast signal, or to enable a
station that has already converted to 3.0
technology to serve as a host for a 3.0
signal), we will use the existing twostep (construction permit and license to
cover) application process to approve
these changes.75
74 A station can convert from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC
3.0 in most cases by simply changing the exciter.
Most new transmitters available today are already
ATSC 3.0 compatible. The interference
characteristics of both standards are functionally
identical.
75 For example, if a full power host station needs
to install a new antenna that would normally
require the filing of an application for a
construction permit, the station must follow the
Commission’s usual two-step licensing process. For
example, if the host station needs to adjust its
omnidirectional antenna no more than two meters
above or four meters below its authorized values,
it must file only a license modification application.
Stations may make such minor license
modifications when applying to convert their
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
C. Temporary Use of Vacant Channels
56. We sought comment in the Next
Gen TV NPRM on whether we should
allow broadcasters to use available or
vacant in-band channels to establish
temporary host facilities for ATSC 1.0 or
ATSC 3.0 channels for purposes of local
simulcasting. We decline to authorize
the use of available channels for this
purpose in this Order as we conclude
such action raises a number of issues
that require further opportunity for
comment and Commission
consideration.
D. MVPD Carriage
57. We discuss in this section the
MVPD carriage rights of broadcasters
that choose to deploy ATSC 3.0 service.
We conclude that a Next Gen TV
broadcaster’s 1.0 simulcast channel will
retain mandatory carriage rights and its
3.0 channel will not have mandatory
carriage rights while the Commission
requires local simulcasting. ATSC 1.0
channels relocating to a temporary host
facility can retain mandatory carriage
rights which they were exercising at
their original location, provided they
continue to qualify for such rights at the
host facility location; we do not permit
those channels to gain new mandatory
carriage rights as a result of their new
location. In addition, we require mustcarry Next Gen TV broadcasters and
retransmission consent Next Gen TV
broadcasters relocating their 1.0
simulcast channel to provide notice to
affected MVPDs at least 90 days in
advance of the move, and 120 days in
advance if the move occurs during the
incentive auction repacking period. We
decline to adopt any additional rules
regarding the carriage of ATSC 3.0
pursuant to retransmission consent.
Such carriage will be voluntary, and we
find that voluntary carriage issues are
best left to marketplace negotiations
between broadcasters and MVPDs.
Finally, in the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, we tentatively
concluded that local simulcasting
should not change the significantly
viewed status of a Next Gen TV
station.76
facility from ATSC 1.0 to 3.0 under the one-step
process.
76 Until we address this issue raised in the
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we impose
a freeze on the filing of any requests to change the
significantly viewed status of Next Gen TV stations
moving their 1.0 simulcast channel. We note that
we need not address here how local simulcasting
may impact the ability of stations to exercise their
network nonduplication and syndicated-exclusivity
rights (exclusivity rules). Because we do not allow
Next Gen TV stations to change their communities
of license, exclusivity zones of protection should
not change. To the extent a station files for a
community of license change solely to enable
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
1. Mandatory Carriage of Next Gen TV
Stations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
58. The Communications Act
establishes slightly different thresholds
for mandatory carriage depending on
whether the television station is full
power or low-power, or commercial or
noncommercial, and also depending on
whether carriage is sought from a cable
operator or satellite carrier. The carriage
rights of commercial stations on cable
systems are set forth in Section 614 of
the Act.77 The carriage rights of full
power NCE stations on cable systems
are set forth in Section 615 of the Act.78
The carriage rights of full power stations
(both commercial and NCE) on satellite
carriers are set forth in Section 338 of
the Act.79
simulcasting, we will consider the impact on the
exclusivity rules on a case-by-case basis.
77 Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 534(a), ‘‘[e]ach cable
operator shall carry, on the cable system of that
operator, the signals of local commercial television
stations . . . as provided by this section.’’ The term
‘‘local commercial television station’’ means ‘‘any
full power television broadcast station, other than
a qualified noncommercial educational television
station . . . licensed and operating on a channel
regularly assigned to its community by the
Commission that, with respect to a particular cable
system, is within the same television market as the
cable system.’’ ‘‘Television market’’ is defined by
Commission’s rules as a Designated Market Area
(DMA). The must-carry rights of low power stations,
including Class A stations, on cable systems are set
forth in Section 614(c) of the Act. Under very
narrow circumstances, such stations can become
‘‘qualified’’ and eligible for must carry. Among the
several requirements for reaching ‘‘qualified’’ status
with respect to a particular cable operator, the
station must be ‘‘located no more than 35 miles
from the cable system’s headend.’’
78 47 U.S.C. 535(a) provides that ‘‘each cable
operator of a cable system shall carry the signals of
qualified noncommercial educational television
stations in accordance with the provisions of this
section.’’ A qualified noncommercial educational
station can be considered ‘‘local,’’ and thus eligible
for mandatory carriage on a cable system, in one of
two ways. It may either be licensed to a principal
community within 50 miles of the system’s
headend, or place a ‘‘Grade B’’ (noise-limited
service contour) signal over the headend.
79 A full power ‘‘television broadcast station’’ is
entitled to request carriage by a satellite carrier any
time that carrier relies on the statutory copyright
license in 17 U.S.C. 122 to retransmit the signal of
any other ‘‘local’’ station (i.e., one located in the
same DMA). 47 U.S.C. 338(a)(1) (‘‘[e]ach satellite
carrier providing . . . secondary transmissions to
subscribers located within the local market of a
television broadcast station of a primary
transmission made by that station shall carry upon
request the signals of all television broadcast
stations located within that local market. . .’’). This
is commonly referred to as the ‘‘carry one, carry all’’
requirement. A ‘‘television broadcast station’’ is
defined as ‘‘an over-the-air commercial or
noncommercial television broadcast station
licensed by the Commission.’’ Low-power stations,
including Class A stations, do not have satellite
carriage rights.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
a. Only 1.0 Has Mandatory Carriage
Rights
59. We adopt the proposal in the Next
Gen TV NPRM 80 that MVPDs must
continue to carry Next Gen TV
broadcasters’ ATSC 1.0 signals,
pursuant to their statutory mandatory
carriage obligations, and that MVPDs
will not be required to carry
broadcasters’ ATSC 3.0 signals during
the period when local simulcasting is
required. Most commenters, including
Petitioners, other broadcasters, MVPDs
and Consumer Groups support this
result.
60. We interpret the Communications
Act to accord mandatory carriage rights
to the signals of ATSC 1.0 simulcast
channels, including those that are
hosting another 1.0 channel and those
that are guest licensees at a temporary
host location. Thus, stations
broadcasting in the mandatory ATSC 1.0
transmission standard will retain
carriage rights. Nothing in the Act
requires a station to occupy an entire 6
MHz channel in order to be eligible for
must-carry rights; rather, the station
must simply be a licensee eligible for
carriage under the applicable provision
of the Act. Under our local simulcasting
rules, guest and host 1.0 simulcast
stations will be separately licensed and
authorized to operate on the same 6
MHz channel (i.e., the host’s original
channel). Therefore, each 1.0 station
may properly assert mandatory carriage
rights under the Act because each will
be ‘‘licensed and operating on a
channel’’ that is ‘‘regularly assigned to
its community’’ by the Commission.
This interpretation of the Act is
consistent with our decisions
authorizing broadcast channel sharing,
in which the Commission found that
both licensees of a shared channel
would have carriage rights.81 No
commenters oppose this conclusion.
61. We also conclude that Next Gen
TV broadcasters will have mandatory
carriage rights for their 1.0 signals and
not their 3.0 signals while the
80 We note that the Petitioners state that MVPDs
‘‘should not be obligated to carry’’ a Next Gen TV
broadcaster’s ATSC 3.0 signal and that MVPDs
could satisfy their obligation to carry a Next Gen TV
station’s signal by carrying the station’s ATSC 1.0
signal.
81 47 U.S.C. 534, 535, and 338 accord carriage
rights to licensees without regard to whether they
occupy a full 6 MHz channel or share a channel
with another licensee. Nothing in the
Communications Act requires a station to occupy
an entire 6 MHz channel in order to be eligible for
must-carry rights; rather, the station must simply be
a licensee eligible for carriage under the applicable
provision of the Communications Act. 47 U.S.C.
534 defines a ‘‘local commercial television station’’
as any commercial full power station ‘‘licensed and
operating on a channel regularly assigned to its
community by the Commission . . . .’’
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5009
Commission requires local simulcasting.
Most commenters agree with this result,
even though they may differ on how to
achieve it. Thus, a Next Gen TV
broadcaster will choose between must
carry or retransmission consent for its
ATSC 1.0 signal, but may only pursue
carriage via retransmission consent for
its ATSC 3.0 signal. This approach is
consistent with the framework used
during the DTV transition. In that
context, the Commission found that,
with regard to licensees that were
simultaneously broadcasting analog and
digital signals, analog signals would
have mandatory carriage rights during
the DTV transition and digital signals
would not. That is, a broadcaster would
choose between must carry or
retransmission consent for its analog
signal but could only pursue carriage
via retransmission consent for its digital
signal. The Commission concluded that
the Communications Act did not require
cable operators to carry both the digital
and analog signals (also referred to as
‘‘dual carriage’’) of a DTV broadcaster
during the DTV transition when
television stations were still
broadcasting analog signals.82
62. We make the analogous finding
here that the Act does not require
carriage of both an ATSC 1.0 and an
ATSC 3.0 signal of the same
broadcaster.83 Because of the local
simulcasting requirement, there will be
a redundancy of basic content between
the 1.0 and the 3.0 signals. If we
imposed a must carry requirement for
both signals, cable operators could be
required to carry double the number of
television signals of virtually identical
content. Moreover, at the initial stages
of the voluntary deployment of 3.0,
consumers likely will not have the
equipment to allow them to display the
3.0 signals. Requiring carriage of such
signals therefore would not further the
objective of must-carry requirements to
promote the availability of OTA
broadcasting. Thus, we agree with
82 The Commission explained that the
Communications Act is ambiguous on the issue of
dual carriage and concluded that mandating dual
carriage was not necessary either to advance the
governmental interests identified by Congress in
enacting the must carry statute or to effectuate the
DTV transition. The Commission observed that
doubling the carriage rights of must carry stations
would substantially increase the burdens on cable
operators’ free speech. The Commission concluded,
in the absence of a clear statutory requirement for
dual carriage, it would not impose such burdens on
cable operators’ free speech.
83 As the Commission found in the DTV transition
context, we likewise find here that the
Communications Act is ambiguous on the issue of
dual carriage of 1.0 and 3.0 signals and conclude
that mandating dual carriage is not necessary to
either advance the governmental interests identified
by Congress in enacting the must carry statute or
to effectuate voluntary 3.0 deployment.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5010
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
NCTA and other MVPD commenters
that ‘‘requiring carriage of the 3.0 signal
in addition to the 1.0 signal would
result in virtually no incremental
viewership of broadcast programming
while seriously compounding the
burden on cable operators’ available
bandwidth.’’
63. In addition, a Next Gen TV
broadcaster will not be able to exercise
mandatory carriage rights with respect
to its 3.0 signal instead of its 1.0 signal,
nor will it have mandatory carriage
rights even if its 3.0 signal is the only
signal being broadcast. In other words,
under no circumstances will we
recognize mandatory carriage rights for
3.0 signals while the Commission
requires local simulcasting.84 The Act
does not specify whether there can be
mandatory carriage rights in
circumstances where a broadcaster has
made a voluntary choice to stop
broadcasting using the mandatory
transmission standard. In addition, the
Act gives the Commission discretion to
‘‘establish any changes in the signal
carriage requirements’’ for purposes of
advancements in technology.85 We find
that mandating any MVPD carriage of
the 3.0 signal at this time would be
antithetical to a voluntary and marketdriven 3.0 deployment for all
stakeholders and would not advance the
interests under the must-carry regime.86
The record shows that MVPDs would
need to purchase new equipment to
receive 3.0 signals and down convert
them to 1.0 so they can redistribute
them to their subscribers. If MVPDs
were required to receive and
redistribute the 3.0 signals (without
down conversion) to subscribers, then
MVPDs would also face burdens on
84 As discussed above, we require Next Gen TV
stations to simulcast, except for LPTV stations and
TV translator stations. 47 U.S.C. 534(h)(2)(D)
requires LPTV stations to deliver a ‘‘good quality’’
over-the-air signal to the cable headend, which the
LPTV station cannot cure through alternate means.
We interpret a ‘‘good quality’’ to not include a 3.0
signal at the present time given the lack of receive
equipment and the MVPD costs to receive it. Thus,
a 3.0-only LPTV station could not qualify for
mandatory carriage.
85 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(B) requires the Commission
‘‘to ensure cable carriage of such broadcast signals
of local commercial television stations which have
been changed . . . .’’ However, until there is
widespread adoption of 3.0 technology by OTA
viewers, mandatory carriage of 3.0 signals would
not serve the goals of promoting OTA broadcasting.
In addition, MVPDs currently are not capable of
receiving and retransmitting the 3.0 signal and will
incur significant costs to obtain such capabilities
when 3.0 technology does become available.
86 In Turner II, a majority of the Supreme Court
recognized that the must-carry provisions serve the
important and interrelated governmental interests
of: (1) ‘‘ ‘preserving the benefits of free, over-the-air
broadcast television,’ ’’ and (2) promoting ‘‘ ‘the
widespread dissemination of information from a
multiplicity of sources.’ ’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
system capacity. Thus, allowing a
broadcaster to demand mandatory
carriage of its 3.0 signal instead of its 1.0
signal would impose significantly
greater costs and burdens on MVPDs.
We find that it would not be reasonable
to interpret the Act in a manner that
would compel MVPDs to incur these
added costs.
64. Although the Commission did
recognize mandatory carriage rights for
digital-only stations during the DTV
transition, that transition was mandated
by statute. By contrast, the decision to
broadcast a 3.0 signal is strictly
voluntary, and it remains uncertain if all
broadcasters will ultimately choose to
provide 3.0 service. We disagree with
ONE Media that we should accord
mandatory carriage rights to a 3.0-only
station if that station could not find a
viable simulcast partner. Even in
circumstances where a station is unable
to find a 1.0 simulcast partner,
deployment of 3.0 service is a voluntary
choice on the part of the broadcaster
and 3.0 carriage would require MVPDs
to incur the significant costs and
burdens described above. Given that 3.0
deployment is intended to be voluntary
for all stakeholders, we find that a
broadcaster’s decision to operate only in
ATSC 3.0 must not require MVPDs to
incur costs associated with receiving
and processing the 3.0 signals before the
MVPD is ready and willing to do so.
65. In support of its argument that 3.0only stations should be entitled to
mandatory carriage rights, ONE Media
also contends that ‘‘ATSC 3.0 decoders
will be readily available by the time
stations initiate 3.0 broadcasts.’’ 87 Even
assuming this is true, carriage of an
ATSC 3.0 signal would still require the
MVPDs to buy such 3.0 decoders.
Although some MVPDs may choose to
purchase 3.0 decoders if it becomes a
more effective and/or less costly way to
redistribute must-carry signals to their
subscribers, we find that MVPDs must
not be required to do so as a result of
the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0.
We also disagree with NAB that a 3.0only station could ‘‘retain the same
carriage rights it would have at its
location if it were transmitting using
ATSC 1.0, but must arrange for the
87 The Independent Television Group (ITG) also
expresses concern that not providing stations with
ATSC 3.0 must-carry rights ‘‘will frustrate and
delay adoption [of ATSC 3.0] in small and medium
markets.’’ ITG, thus, suggests that the Commission
‘‘defer a decision on carriage rights’’ until after
consumer equipment becomes available rather than
for the duration of the mandatory local simulcasting
period. As explained herein, we find that a
broadcaster’s decision to operate in ATSC 3.0 must
not require MVPDs to incur costs associated with
receiving and processing the 3.0 signals before the
MVPD is ready and willing to do so.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
delivery of its signal to any MVPDs
required to carry the station’s signal in
a format the MVPD is capable of
receiving.’’ We agree with ATVA that
broadcasters cannot secure mandatory
carriage rights ‘‘by promising to deliver
signals ‘in a format the MVPD is capable
of receiving.’ ’’ As explained by ATVA,
‘‘[b]roadcasters can, of course, deliver
signals for which they have must carry
rights using alternative means. But if a
broadcaster transmits only in ATSC 3.0,
there is no off-air signal for which the
broadcaster has must-carry rights. How
a broadcaster chooses to deliver that
signal has no legal relevance.’’
b. Rights of Relocated 1.0 Simulcast
Channel
66. Having established that mandatory
carriage rights will attach only to an
ATSC 1.0 signal, we now turn to the
issue of whether, and, if so, to what
extent, 1.0 mandatory carriage rights
move to the temporary host location, if
the broadcaster opts to relocate its 1.0
simulcast channel to a host’s facility.88
We find that, to assert 1.0 mandatory
carriage rights, the 1.0 channel must
continue to qualify for such rights at the
temporary location from which it will
transmit the 1.0 signal; however, we
interpret the statute to not allow such a
temporary move to provide the station
with new or expanded carriage rights
not previously held and exercised by
the 1.0 station. Our conclusion here
interprets the must-carry statute to
minimize the burdens on MVPDs to
only those necessary to advance the
interests of the must-carry regime.
Allowing expansion of 1.0 mandatory
carriage rights through local
simulcasting also would be inconsistent
with the purpose of our local
simulcasting requirement, which is to
maintain 1.0 service to existing
viewers.89
67. A Next Gen TV broadcaster’s 1.0
mandatory carriage rights will be
determined based on the location from
which the 1.0 signal is being
transmitted.90 We recognize that, in
88 In the Next Gen TV NPRM, based on the
proposed approach in the Channel Sharing Outside
Auction Context NPRM, the Commission proposed
that a broadcaster’s mandatory carriage rights
would track its relocated ATSC 1.0 simulcast
channel. Under the approach we adopt here (i.e.,
declining to require carriage of 3.0 signal)), a Next
Gen TV broadcaster’s mandatory carriage rights will
not change as a result of the Next Gen TV
deployment if the 1.0 simulcast channel remains at
the Next Gen TV broadcaster’s existing facility
(assuming no changes to the existing facility).
89 Our conclusion is also consistent with the
Commission’s recent order authorizing channel
sharing outside the auction context.
90 Full-power commercial stations generally are
entitled to mandatory carriage throughout their
local market area, so a shift in coverage area,
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
certain situations, stations may no
longer qualify for mandatory carriage
rights at a temporary host location;
however, we find that it would be
inconsistent with the must-carry statute
and unduly burdensome for MVPDs to
require them to carry a 1.0 signal based
on carriage rights at a different location
from that which the signal is being
broadcast. Because full-power
commercial stations must remain within
their DMA 91 and must retain and
continue to serve their current
communities of license with their 1.0
simulcast channel, their carriage rights
are unlikely to change.92 By contrast,
the 1.0 cable carriage rights of NCE,
Class A and LPTV stations may be
affected in certain situations. For
example, an NCE station that qualifies
for carriage based on its contour
encompassing the cable headend cannot
continue to qualify for carriage rights at
community of license, or transmitter of a full-power
commercial station is unlikely to change which
cable systems must carry the station, provided there
is no change in DMA and the station agrees to bear
the costs to deliver a good quality signal to the cable
operator. Noncommercial educational (NCE)
stations’ cable carriage rights are determined based
on whether the relevant cable headend is located
within 50 miles of the station’s community of
license or if the headend is located within the
station’s noise limited service contour (NLSC). NCE
station’s satellite carriage rights, however, are based
on their local market area. Cable carriage rights of
a Class A and LPTV station depend on, among other
things, if (i) it is not located in the same county or
other political subdivision (of a State) as a fullpower station; (ii) its transmitter is within 35 miles
of the cable system’s principal headend; and (iii) it
delivers a good quality signal to that headend
(although, unlike NCE and full power commercial
stations, it will have no right to improve the quality
of its signal to meet the signal quality threshold).
Class A and LPTV stations do not have satellite
carriage rights. Therefore, a change in coverage area,
community of license, or transmitter location could
affect which cable systems must carry an NCE,
Class A or LPTV station.
91 We agree with ATVA that 1.0 simulcast
channels must remain within their same DMA to
avoid complications with carriage rights. Consistent
with the channel sharing context, we find that
disallowing DMA changes would minimize the
potential impact of local simulcasting on MVPDs
because carriage rights on a particular MVPD
system generally depend on the station’s DMA.
‘‘Because satellite and cable carriage rights on a
particular MVPD system generally depend on the
station’s DMA, prohibiting moves that would result
in a change of DMA will minimize the potential
impact of channel sharing on MVPDs.’’ We also
agree with ATVA that ‘‘[p]ermitting an ATSC 1.0
signal to move to a different local market could
trigger additional copyright royalties as well’’.
92 We note that a full-power commercial station’s
priority for cable carriage with respect to other inmarket stations affiliated with the same network
may be affected if we allow the station to change
its 1.0 channel’s community of license via a waiver.
Based on existing carriage rules, in the event the 1.0
simulcast channel does not reach the cable headend
or satellite local receive facility, the Next Gen TV
broadcaster must deliver a good quality 1.0 signal
to the MVPD either over-the-air or by alternate
means, or must agree to bear the costs associated
with the delivery of such good quality 1.0 signal to
the MVPD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
the temporary host location if the shift
in contour means the station can no
longer cover the cable headend.93
Similarly, Class A and LPTV stations
may no longer qualify for cable carriage
at the temporary location if the change
in transmitter location means the station
will be located more than 35 miles from
the cable system’s headend, or if the
shift in coverage area means the station
can no longer deliver a good quality 1.0
signal to the cable headend.
68. We disagree with Petitioners and
other broadcasters that, in 1.0 channel
relocation situations, 1.0 mandatory
carriage rights could and should remain
unchanged and be determined based on
the original facility. Petitioners argue
that, under a licensed simulcast
approach, which we adopt above,
because both the 1.0 and 3.0 signal will
be under the same license, the
broadcaster can designate its 1.0
channel as its ‘‘primary video stream’’
entitled to mandatory carriage rights,
even if that signal is relocated to a new
location. This argument does not
recognize that the 1.0 and 3.0 signals are
each a distinct signal transmitted on
separate channels and are not two
programming streams transmitted
together on the same channel.94
Although the 1.0 signal is a separately
authorized channel under the
originating station’s license, it is not on,
or otherwise considered part of, the
same channel as the originating station’s
3.0 signal.
69. To minimize carriage burdens on
MVPDs that could result from a 1.0
station’s temporary move, we also
interpret the statute to not allow a
station’s temporary move to a 1.0 host
facility to provide the station with new
or expanded mandatory carriage rights.
Allowing a 1.0 simulcast channel to
gain new or expanded mandatory
carriage rights due to the temporary and
voluntary relocation of the 1.0 signal to
a host station’s facility could pose
significant burdens on MVPDs that
would not advance the interests of the
93 In addition, we note that an NCE station that
qualifies for mandatory carriage because the
relevant cable headend is located within 50 miles
of its community of license cannot continue to
qualify for mandatory carriage at the temporary host
location if the station is allowed to change its
community of license via a waiver to outside of the
50 miles from the headend.
94 We note that the reference to a broadcaster’s
‘‘primary video stream’’ in the DTV context relates
to the question of whether multicast streams should
be entitled to mandatory carriage and not the
question of whether the analog and digital signal
should be carried (dual carriage) during the DTV
transition. As discussed above, we are not treating
a 1.0 simulcast signal as a multicast stream, but
rather as a second companion channel of the Next
Gen TV licensee, based on the DTV transition
context.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5011
must-carry regime nor the purpose of
local simulcasting. In the channel
sharing context, the Commission
determined that carriage rights would be
based on the shared location and
observed that certain stations may gain
carriage on some cable systems, but lose
carriage on others, as a result of the
movements of their facilities or the
changes in their communities of license.
Unlike the channel sharing context,
Next Gen TV broadcasters are not
relinquishing the station at their original
channel, but rather will continue to
operate on it and will ultimately return
to it when the local simulcasting
requirement ends. Moreover,
broadcasters may need to relocate 1.0
simulcast channels multiple times while
local simulcasting is required, thus
further burdening MVPDs if carriage
rights could expand at every move.
Finally, any expansion of 1.0 service
due to such relocations will be
temporary and will not serve to
maintain existing 1.0 service or to
preserve over-the-air broadcast
viewership. Therefore, we find that a
guest licensee’s 1.0 simulcast channel
moved to a temporary host facility may
assert mandatory carriage rights only if
it (1) qualified for, and has been
exercising, mandatory carriage rights at
its original location and (2) continues to
qualify for mandatory carriage at the
host facility, including (but not limited
to) delivering a good quality 1.0 signal
to the cable system principal headend or
satellite carrier local receive facility, or
agreeing to be responsible for the costs
of delivering such 1.0 signal to the
MVPD.95
70. Market Modification. The
relocation of a 1.0 simulcast channel to
a temporary host facility (even though it
would remain within the station’s DMA)
raises the possibility that the station
may be able to reach new communities
outside of its DMA. We are unlikely to
rule favorably on a request by a full
power commercial station that relocates
95 Under our existing must-carry rules,
broadcasters are required to bear the costs of
delivering a good quality signal to MVPDs. The
rules, however, do not apply to the costs on MVPDs
of receiving and redistributing the signal to their
subscribers and so MVPDs generally assume these
costs. Such costs are generally viewed as the costs
of doing business as MVPDs. MVPDs, however, ask
us to require Next Gen TV broadcasters to
reimburse MVPDs for the costs associated with the
reception and processing of 1.0 simulcasts. We
decline to do so. We agree with PTV that receiving
and redistributing broadcast signals are ‘‘a basic
cost of doing business for an MVPD.’’ We recognize
that we reimbursed such costs to MVPDs in the
incentive auction context. The reimbursement of
MVPDs in connection with the incentive auction
was mandated by statute. 47 U.S.C.
1452(b)(4)(A)(ii). The costs incurred due to local
simulcasting will occur on a market-driven basis
and are properly borne by the MVPDs.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5012
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
its 1.0 simulcast channel to modify its
market 96 to add new communities
outside of its DMA based on a
temporary shift in its 1.0 service
contour.97 This approach is consistent
with our conclusion above that stations
will not be able to expand the
mandatory carriage rights of an ATSC
1.0 signal by relocating to a temporary
1.0 host facility. As discussed above,
any expansion of 1.0 service due to such
relocations will be temporary and will
not serve to maintain existing 1.0
service or to preserve over-the-air
broadcast viewership.98 In addition,
because 1.0 service relocations will be
temporary, we will disfavor a request by
a cable system or satellite carrier to
modify a 1.0 simulcast station’s market
to delete communities based on the
temporary shift in the 1.0 station’s
service contour.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
2. Notice to MVPDs About Relocation of
1.0 Simulcast Channel
71. We require all Next Gen TV
broadcasters relocating their 1.0
simulcast channel (e.g., moving to a
temporary host facility, subsequently
moving to a different host, or returning
96 Market modification is a process established by
statute that allows the Commission to modify the
boundaries of a particular full power commercial
station’s local television market assignment for
cable or satellite carriage purposes. Each full power
commercial television station is assigned to a local
market defined by the Designated Market Area
(DMA) in which it is located, as determined by the
Nielsen Company (Nielsen). Sections 338(l) and
614(h)(1)(C) of the Communications Act permit the
Commission, in response to a written request to add
communities to, or delete communities from, a
station’s local market to better reflect marketplace
conditions. 47 U.S.C. 338(l)(1), 534(h)(1)(C). The
Commission determines whether to grant a market
modification based on consideration of five
statutory factors that allow petitioners to
demonstrate that a particular station provides or
does not provide local service to a specific
community. Full power commercial television
stations and cable systems may file cable market
modification petitions and full power commercial
television stations, satellite carriers, and county
governments may file satellite market modification
petitions. We note that market modifications are not
available to NCE, Class A or LPTV stations.
97 We note that the scope of a station’s signal is
only one aspect of our analysis under factor two,
which is one of five statutory factors which the
Commission must consider in deciding whether to
grant or deny a market modification request.
Whether a full power commercial station loses its
ability to exercise its carriage rights in particular
communities depends on whether a market
modification is sought and the application of these
statutory factors and other relevant considerations.
In this context, the temporary nature of local
simulcasting and the availability of a 3.0 signal in
the community at issue are appropriate additional
considerations for evaluating a station’s local
connection to the community.
98 In other words, we conclude that any increase
in mandatory carriage obligations on MVPDs would
not be warranted to advance the interests of the
must-carry regime or local simulcasting. Local
simulcasting is intended to preserve 1.0 viewership,
not permanently expand such viewership.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
to its original facility) to provide notice
to those MVPDs that: (1) No longer will
be required to carry the station’s 1.0
signal due to the relocation; or (2)
currently carry the station’s 1.0 signal
from the existing location and will
continue to be obligated to carry the
station’s 1.0 signal from the new
location.99 The Next Gen TV NPRM
sought comment on what appropriate
notice to MVPDs would be, noting that
the Petition proposed that must-carry
broadcasters should give notice to
MVPDs at least 60 days in advance of
relocating their 1.0 simulcast channel to
a temporary host facility. As suggested
by AT&T, we require all broadcasters to
give notice to MVPDs: (1) At least 120
days in advance of relocating their 1.0
simulcast channel to a temporary host
facility if the relocation occurs during
the post-incentive auction transition
period; 100 and (2) at least 90 days in
advance of relocating their 1.0 simulcast
channel to a temporary host facility if
the relocation occurs after the postincentive auction transition period. The
90-day notice requirement is consistent
with the rules adopted by the
Commission in the channel sharing
context, and we are persuaded by AT&T
and other MVPDs that additional time is
needed during the 39-month repacking
period because of the added
complications and burdens during that
period.101 If the anticipated date of the
1.0 service relocation changes, the
station must send a further notice to
affected MVPDs informing them of the
new anticipated date for 1.0 service
relocation.
72. Consistent with the channel
sharing context and AT&T’s proposal,
the notice must contain the following
information: (1) Date and time of the 1.0
channel change; (2) the 1.0 channel
occupied by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(3) modification, if any, to antenna
position, location, or power levels; (4)
stream identification information,
99 Our rules here are similar to those adopted by
the Commission in the channel sharing context
outside of the incentive auction. In this regard, as
the notice provision in the channel sharing context
applies to all broadcasters, we agree with ATVA
that this notice requirement for local simulcasting
must apply to all broadcasters. We also agree with
ATVA that a ‘‘single set of rules for all broadcasters
would promote efficiency and prevent consumer
disruption.’’
100 The Commission has determined that the 39month Post-Auction Transition Period will end on
July 13, 2020.
101 We are not persuaded by NCTA that six
months’ advance notice is generally warranted, but
we will consider waivers requesting additional time
if good cause is shown. We note that ONE Media
disagreed with any advance notice requirement, but
their position was premised on mandatory carriage
rights remaining at the original facility, which we
decided will not occur in 1.0 relocation situations.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
including program numbers for each
programming stream; and (5)
engineering staff contact information. If
any of this information changes, an
amended notification must be sent.
Stations may choose whether to provide
notice via a letter notification 102 or
electronically via email, if pre-arranged
with the relevant MVPD.
3. Retransmission Consent Issues
73. Beyond the notice requirement
mentioned above, we do not adopt any
rules related to voluntary carriage of 3.0
signals through retransmission consent
at this time. The Next Gen TV NPRM
sought comment on issues related to the
voluntary carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals
through the retransmission consent
process. MVPD commenters express the
concern that Next Gen TV broadcasters
could use the retransmission consent
process to compel carriage of 3.0 signals
before consumer demand and market
circumstances warrant. To address those
concerns, they request that we require
parties to (1) negotiate for carriage of 3.0
signals separately from carriage of 1.0
signals, (2) nullify existing contractual
clauses that would require MVPDs to
carry 3.0 signals, and (3) in the event of
a good faith complaint, subpoena
negotiation-related documents under a
protective order to overcome any nondisclosure provisions.103 NTCA requests
that we prohibit carriage of ATSC 3.0
signals via retransmission consent.
Broadcasters, on the other hand, urge us
to allow the marketplace to resolve
voluntary carriage issues without
adopting any new retransmission
consent rules.
74. We conclude that it is premature
to address any issues that may arise
with respect to the voluntary carriage of
ATSC 3.0 signals before broadcasters
begin transmitting in this new voluntary
standard.104 Therefore, we decline to
102 Letter notifications to MVPDs must be sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested to the
MVPD’s address in the FCC’s Online Public
Inspection File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have an online
file, notices must be sent to the cable system’s
official address of record provided in the system’s
most recent filing in the FCC’s Cable Operations
and Licensing System (COALS). For MVPDs with
no official address in OPIF or COALS, the letter
must be sent to the MVPD’s official corporate
address registered with their State of incorporation.
103 Although commenters argue that we have the
legal authority to adopt retransmission consent
rules related to carriage, no commenter argues that
the statute compels us to adopt such rules.
104 ACA requests that the Commission ‘‘clarify
that cable operators and broadcasters can lawfully
agree in retransmission consent agreements to the
downconversion of ATSC 3.0 signals,
notwithstanding the ‘material degradation’
provisions in the Communications Act.’’ Letter from
Ross J. Lieberman, American Cable Ass’n, to
Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
adopt any new rules regarding
retransmission consent in this
proceeding and will allow these issues
at the outset to be addressed through
marketplace negotiations. We make
clear, however, that MVPDs are under
no statutory or regulatory obligation to
carry any 3.0 signals and remind parties
of the statutory requirement that they
negotiate in good faith.
E. FCC Public Interest Obligations and
Other FCC Rules
75. In this section, we address several
additional topics related to the
voluntary deployment of Next Gen TV.
First, we explain that Next Gen TV
broadcasters are subject to our broadcast
rules. Second, we decline to adopt a
requirement that television broadcast
receivers include ATSC 3.0-compatible
receivers. Third, we require
broadcasters to notify the public about
their deployment of Next Gen TV
service. Fourth, we decline to change
the fees that we charge broadcasters that
offer ancillary services at this time.105
And finally, we reiterate that the
Commission will not use the TV
Broadcaster Relocation Fund to
reimburse costs associated with ATSC
3.0 capability.
1. Applicability of Public Interest
Obligations and Other Broadcast Rules
to Next Gen TV
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
76. We require Next Gen TV
broadcasters to comply with all of our
broadcast rules, including, but not
limited to, our rules regarding foreign
ownership, political broadcasting,
children’s programming, equal
employment opportunities, public
inspection file, indecency, sponsorship
identification, contests, the CALM Act,
the Emergency Alert System (EAS), and
accessibility for people with disabilities.
As television stations engaged in
‘‘broadcasting’’ under the Act, Next Gen
TV stations will be public trustees with
a responsibility to serve the ‘‘public
interest, convenience, and necessity.’’ In
the Petition, Petitioners suggest that
broadcasters implementing ATSC 3.0
should remain subject to all relevant
Commission rules, and commenters
16–142 et al., at 1 (filed Nov. 9, 2017). See 47 U.S.C.
534(b)(4)(A), 535(g)(2). As we state above, 3.0
signals do not have must-carry rights, and an
MVPD’s decision as to whether or not to carry an
ATSC 3.0 signal via retransmission consent can be
resolved through marketplace negotiations.
105 We note that three commenters expressed
concern about today’s action implicating consumer
privacy, but none offered any evidence or
substantiation to support their speculative
assertions about such harm or any alternatives to
address the alleged harm. In the absence of such
evidence, we decline to alter today’s action to
address their conclusory assertions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
overwhelmingly support applying the
same public interest obligations that
apply to broadcasters transmitting under
the current ATSC 1.0 standard to those
transmitting using the ATSC 3.0
standard. We agree and conclude that
all of our broadcast rules that currently
apply when a broadcaster is providing
a free, over-the-air video stream
broadcast in ATSC 1.0 will apply
equally when it is providing a free, overthe-air video stream broadcast in ATSC
3.0.106
77. With respect to accessibility of
Next Gen TV programming, we
emphasize that broadcasters that choose
to deploy ATSC 3.0 are expected to
comply fully with all relevant Part 79
requirements. Among other
requirements, these rules require
television broadcasters to ensure that all
new, nonexempt English language and
Spanish language programming
distributed on their channels is closed
captioned; that closed captioning
contained in all programming received
from video programming providers is
passed through; and that local
emergency information is accessible to
persons who are deaf or hard of hearing
and to persons who are blind or have
visual disabilities. These rules also
require local TV station affiliates of
ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC located in the
top 60 TV markets to provide a specified
number of hours per calendar quarter of
video-described prime time and/or
children’s programming.107 In addition,
Next Gen TV receivers and other
equipment with ATSC 3.0 tuners must
comply with all applicable Part 79 rules,
including closed captioning decoder
requirements, video description and
emergency information accessibility
requirements, and requirements for user
interfaces, programming guides, and
menus.108
106 We note that the public interest obligations
and other broadcast rules will apply to all ATSC 3.0
video programming streams, except that Next Gen
TV broadcasters will be required to use A/322 only
with respect to the primary video programming
stream. Given that the local simulcasting
requirement adopted herein is temporary, we will
not apply the broadcast ownership rules in any
situation where airing an ATSC 3.0 signal or an
ATSC 1.0 simulcast on a temporary host station’s
facility would result in a potential violation of those
rules.
107 Currently, commercial television broadcast
stations that are affiliated with ABC, CBS, Fox, and
NBC and located in the top 60 TV markets must
provide 50 hours of video description per calendar
quarter during prime time or children’s
programming. Beginning July 1, 2018, covered
stations must also provide an additional 37.5 hours
of video description per calendar quarter between
6 a.m. and midnight.
108 NAB asserts that the ATSC 3.0 standard
includes the accessibility tools necessary to comply
with the Commission’s rules and that Next Gen TV
devices will fully meet their accessibility
obligations.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5013
78. As the Consumer Groups
recommend, we clarify that MVPDs that
agree to carry ATSC 3.0 signals must
comply with 47 CFR 79.1(c), which
spells out the requirements for video
programming distributors to pass
through and maintain the quality of
closed captions. We also clarify that the
use of image overlays or rasterized
textual content will not relieve Next
Gen TV broadcasters of their obligation
to provide textual closed captions in
accordance with Part 79 of the
Commission’s rules.
2. Next Gen TV Tuner Mandate
79. We revise our rules to make clear
that there is no Next Gen TV tuner
mandate. TV receivers capable of
receiving ATSC 3.0 signals are not yet
available in the U.S. Without revising
our existing rules, television receivers
would be required to include ATSC 3.0
tuners when broadcasters begin
transmitting ATSC 3.0 signals.
Specifically, 47 CFR 15.117(b), the rule
implementing the Commission’s
authority under the 1962 All Channel
Receiver Act (ACRA), provides that ‘‘TV
broadcast receivers shall be capable of
adequately receiving all channels
allocated by the Commission to the
television broadcast service.’’ Section
303(s) of the Act, as codified by ACRA,
grants the Commission ‘‘from time to
time, as public convenience, interest, or
necessity requires’’ the ‘‘authority to
require that apparatus designed to
receive television pictures broadcast
simultaneously with sound be capable
of adequately receiving all frequencies
allocated by the Commission to
television broadcasting.’’ This provision
leaves it to the Commission’s discretion
when to require that television receivers
be capable of receiving all television
broadcast frequencies. We conclude that
a tuner mandate is unnecessary at this
time given that the deployment of ATSC
3.0 will be voluntary and market-driven
and that broadcasters will continue to
transmit ATSC 1.0 signals indefinitely.
We agree with commenters that
consumer demand will drive the
inclusion of ATSC 3.0 tuners in
television receivers. Accordingly, we are
revising 47 CFR 15.117(b) to make clear
that this rule does not apply to ATSC
3.0.
80. We are not persuaded by ATBA’s
argument that a Next Gen TV tuner
mandate for all television receivers, as
well as smartphones and other mobile
devices designed to receive and display
television signals, is critical to the
preservation of LPTV service. ATBA
asserts that repacking following the
incentive auction will displace
thousands of LPTV stations and the
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5014
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
more flexible characteristics of Next Gen
TV may allow displaced LPTV stations
to find spectrum in places where a
displacement channel would otherwise
be impossible. ATBA further asserts that
LPTV stations may wish to be early
adopters of Next Gen TV to distinguish
their service and ensuring that Next Gen
TV tuners are in all receive devices will
enhance the service that LPTV stations
can provide to the public. Although we
are exempting LPTV stations from the
local simulcasting requirement and
allowing them to transition directly to
ATSC 3.0 service, we do not believe that
a Next Gen TV tuner mandate is
necessary to ensure the survival of the
LPTV service. As discussed above, we
expect that once broadcasters begin
transmitting in ATSC 3.0, consumer
demand for the advanced features of
Next Gen TV will propel the
manufacture and distribution of TV
receivers with ATSC 3.0 tuners. We also
agree with commenters that the
incorporation of ATSC 3.0 tuners into
smartphones and other mobile devices
should be driven by consumer demand.
81. We agree with commenters that it
is unnecessary to require that all TV
receivers sold after a specified date have
an HDMI port to permit attachment of
a converter device, such as an external
tuner dongle, set-top box, or gateway
device, that would enable the receivers
to be easily upgradeable to receive
ATSC 3.0 transmissions. The Public
Interest Groups observe that in the past
three years in which Consumer Reports
has been testing new televisions, all of
the tested devices contained at least one
HDMI port. The Public Interest Groups
assert that a consumer would be hardpressed to purchase a new television
today or in the future that did not have
an HDMI port. Moreover, NAB suggests
that an HDMI port requirement could be
counterproductive and harmful to
consumers, locking manufacturers into
an unnecessary cost associated with a
specific technology regardless of
marketplace developments.
3. On-Air Notice to Consumers About
Deployment of ATSC 3.0 Service and
ATSC 1.0 Simulcasting
82. As discussed below, we are
adopting consumer education
requirements modeled on the consumer
education requirements adopted in
connection with the incentive auction
for broadcasters that will transition to
new channels post-auction. Consumer
education will be crucial to the
successful deployment of Next Gen TV
service and simulcasting of ATSC 1.0
service. Consumers will need to be
informed if stations they view will be
changing channels and encouraged to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
rescan their receivers for new channel
assignments. Although we agree that
broadcasters will be motivated to inform
viewers of the availability and features
of Next Gen TV and how to continue to
receive their ATSC 1.0 signals during
simulcasting, we conclude that
consumer education requirements are
needed to ensure that broadcasters
provide adequate notice to viewers and
to minimize any potential disruption to
viewers.
83. All stations that relocate their
ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a host
station’s facility, subsequently moving
to a different host, or returning to its
original facility) must air daily on-air
consumer education PSAs or crawls,109
beginning 30 days prior to the date that
the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0
operations on their existing facilities.
Stations will have the option of
choosing between PSAs and crawls or
may air a mix of PSAs and crawls.
Stations will also have the discretion to
choose the timeslots in which their
PSAs or crawls will air. Crawls must be
provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by
the station.110 Although we are not
mandating specific language, crawls
must provide all pertinent information
to consumers.
84. We conclude that this will ensure
that viewers are apprised of the
potential impact of the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0 service on
them. PSAs must also be provided in
the same language as a majority of the
programming carried by the station,
provide all pertinent information to
consumers, and be closed captioned.111
85. We will also require LPTV stations
and any other stations that transition
directly to ATSC 3.0 to provide on-air
notifications to ensure that viewers are
aware that they will no longer be able
to receive the signals of these stations in
ATSC 1.0 and that they may need to
obtain new equipment to receive the
ATSC 3.0 transmissions of these
stations. Stations that transition directly
to ATSC 3.0 must provide on-air
notifications beginning 30 days prior to
the date that they terminate their ATSC
1.0 operations. Such crawls or PSAs
109 A ‘‘crawl’’ is ‘‘text that advances very slowly
across the bottom or top of the screen.’’ Stations
may use alternative forms of crawls, including a
text ‘‘flipper,’’ which is a message on the screen that
flips to a new line of text instead of crawling across
the screen.
110 The crawls should not block any closed
captioning or emergency information.
111 We recognize that our rules exempt PSAs that
are shorter than 10 minutes in duration from the
captioning requirements. Given the importance of
the information to be included in these PSAs,
however, we expressly require that these PSAs be
closed captioned regardless of their duration.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
must provide all pertinent information
to consumers. To the extent that such
equipment is available, we encourage
stations to include in their on-air
notices and on their websites
information about the availability of
external tuner dongles and gateway
devices that can be used to upgrade
viewers’ TV receivers to receive ATSC
3.0 transmissions. These stations must
otherwise comply with the same on-air
notification requirements set forth above
for stations that relocate their ATSC 1.0
signals.
86. The Commission will support
broadcasters’ consumer education
efforts by, among other things,
responding to consumer questions
regarding the deployment of Next Gen
TV and ATSC 1.0 simulcasting and
providing consumer assistance on
rescanning TVs. In addition, the
Commission will update its website
(www.fcc.gov) to provide additional
information and guidance to consumers
on Next Gen TV.
4. Ancillary and Supplementary
Services
87. We decline to reexamine the fee
that broadcasters must pay to offer
ancillary and supplemental services at
this time, as requested by several
commenters. Broadcasters currently
must remit an annual fee equal to five
percent of the gross revenues derived
from any ancillary or supplementary
services for which viewers must pay a
subscription fee, or for which the
broadcaster directly or indirectly
receives compensation from a third
party in exchange for the transmission
of material provided by the third party
(other than commercial advertisements
used to support broadcasting for which
a fee is not required). Under Section 336
of the Act, the Commission is required
to set the ancillary services fee so as to
(1) recover for the public a portion of
the value of the public spectrum made
available for ancillary or supplemental
use by broadcasters, (2) avoid unjust
enrichment of broadcasters, and (3)
recover for the public an amount that
equals the amount that would have been
recovered at auction. In addition, the
Commission must adjust the ancillary
services fee periodically to ensure that
these requirements continue to be met.
Some commenters suggest that a higher
fee may be warranted to ensure
compliance with the statutory directive,
while others assert that the fee should
be reduced to ensure that it does not
thwart innovation by Next Gen TV
broadcasters.
88. We conclude that it would be
premature at this time to adjust the fee
associated with ancillary services. It is
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
not clear from the record which ATSC
3.0-based services and features will be
‘‘ancillary services’’ within the meaning
of our rules or which such services will
be feeable. Moreover, we note that
compared to other revenue sources,
ancillary services today remain an
insignificant portion of total station
revenue. Once Next Gen TV
broadcasters have implemented
ancillary and supplementary services,
the Commission will be in a better
position to assess whether adjustment of
the ancillary services fee is warranted
and may revisit this issue.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
5. Interplay With Post-Incentive Auction
Transition/Repack
89. Authorizing the deployment of
Next Gen TV on a voluntary basis
concurrently with the post-incentive
auction transition is likely to create
efficiencies for repacked stations that
want to upgrade to ATSC 3.0. In
particular, commenters point out that
the incremental cost of adding Next Gen
TV capability as part of a station’s
equipment reconfiguration or upgrade
during the repack process will be
significantly less than the cost of
upgrading equipment twice, once for the
repack and once for the deployment of
ATSC 3.0 service. We reiterate that all
requests for reimbursement from the TV
Broadcaster Relocation Fund
(Reimbursement Fund), including those
for ATSC 3.0 capable equipment, will be
evaluated consistent with the standards
set forth in the Incentive Auction Report
and Order. In that order, the
Commission recognized that
replacement of equipment eligible for
reimbursement from the Reimbursement
Fund ‘‘necessarily may include
improved functionality,’’ but stated
‘‘[w]e do not . . . anticipate providing
reimbursement for new, optional
features in equipment unless the station
or MVPD documents that the feature is
already present in the equipment that is
being replaced. Eligible stations and
MVPDs may elect to purchase optional
equipment capability or make other
upgrades at their own cost, but only the
cost of the equipment without optional
upgrades is a reimbursable expense.’’
Thus, for example, broadcasters will be
allowed to seek reimbursement for
equipment that facilitates ATSC 3.0
capability (such as higher transmitter
power or horizontal/elliptical antenna
polarization), but any costs associated
with the ATSC 3.0 capability will not be
reimbursable (i.e., broadcasters will be
responsible for the difference between
the cost of the ATSC 3.0-capable
equipment and the equipment needed to
broadcast using the ATSC 1.0
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
standard).112 We will also monitor the
filing of license applications filed by
stations that seek to deploy ATSC 3.0
and the Media Bureau may seek
information it deems necessary from
broadcasters to ensure this voluntary
transition does not negatively impact or
delay the mandatory post-incentive
auction transition.
F. Technical Issues
90. In this section, we resolve
technical issues that the authorization of
ATSC 3.0 raises. First, we incorporate
certain parts of the ATSC 3.0 standard
by reference into our rules. Next, we
adopt our proposal to calculate Next
Gen TV interference to DTV signals
using the methodology and planning
factors specified OET–69. Finally, we
conclude that broadcast television
stations may operate ATSC 3.0 Single
Frequency Networks pursuant to our
current rules that authorize Distributed
Transmission Systems.
1. Incorporation by Reference of
Technical Standards
91. We incorporate two parts of the
ATSC 3.0 ‘‘physical layer’’ standard into
our rules: (1) ATSC A/321:2016 ‘‘System
Discovery & Signaling’’ (A/321), which
is the standard used to communicate the
RF signal type that the ATSC 3.0 signal
will use, and (2) A/322:2017 ‘‘Physical
Layer Protocol’’ (A/322), which is the
standard that defines the waveforms
that ATSC 3.0 signals may take. With
respect to A/322, we apply the standard
only to a Next Gen TV station’s primary
free over-the-air video programming
stream and incorporate it by reference
into our rules for a period of five years
from the date of publication in the
Federal Register.113 We do not
incorporate any other of the ATSC 3.0
standards; broadcasters are authorized,
but not required, to use any other
elements of ATSC 3.0. The ATSC 3.0
standards are reasonably available
because they are available on the ATSC
website at: www.atsc.org/standards/
atsc-3-0-standards/ and from ATSC at
their office: 1776 K Street NW, 8th
Floor, Washington, DC 20006.
92. The ATSC 3.0 suite of standards
is split into multiple parts under a
112 NAB asserts that ‘‘current generation
equipment that will be deployed during repacking
is, in many cases, already Next Gen compatible, or
capable of being easily upgraded to be Next Gencompatible. To the extent there are any cost
differences between equipment that is Next Gencompatible and equipment that is not, NAB has
stated that it is committed to assisting the FCC in
ensuring that repacking funds are not directed to
unwarranted or unnecessary upgrades.’’
113 As we discuss below in paragraphs 100–101,
this requirement will sunset at the end of the fiveyear period unless extended by the Commission via
rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5015
unifying parent standard. The ATSC 3.0
standards are structured into three
layers: (1) The physical layer, (2) the
management and protocols layer, and
(3) the applications and presentation
layer. Each of the standards fits into
only one layer, making it possible to
develop and update each part
independently. The physical layer
includes the definition of the radio
frequency (RF) waveform used in ATSC
3.0, as well as the coding and error
correction that determine the robustness
of the signal to noise and interference.
The management and protocols layer
organizes data bits into streams and files
and establishes the protocol for the
receiver to direct those streams to the
proper destinations. The applications
and presentation layer includes audio
and video compression technologies,
captions and descriptive audio,
emergency alerts, parental controls, and
interactive applications. It also specifies
how the station is displayed to viewers.
93. A/321. We adopt our proposal to
incorporate by reference and make
mandatory for Next Gen TV
broadcasting the ATSC A/321 standard.
Commenters broadly support this
action. As the entry point to the
physical layer of the ATSC 3.0
standards, A/321 defines a brief robust
‘‘bootstrap’’ signal followed by a
window for data transmission that is
periodic and contains information to
help Next Gen TV receivers quickly
locate and understand the RF formats of
the data portions of the Next Gen TV
signal. The bootstrap signal can indicate
that the remainder of the signal is one
of many different RF signal types.114
This gives the broadcast industry the
ability to later define additional signal
types while using a consistent bootstrap
signal that can indicate to Next Gen TV
receivers that they can ignore portions
of the signal that are not compatible
with that particular receiver. The
bootstrap further serves to split the
overall signal into segments that can
follow different standards and/or use
different robustness parameters. The
bootstrap signal also includes data that
can wake a receiver from standby mode
to receive and display emergency
information. By incorporating and
making mandatory the A/321 standard,
we ensure that the RF waveforms of the
bootstrap portion of broadcasters’ Next
Gen TV signals will be fully defined.
94. A/322. We also incorporate by
reference the ATSC A/322 standard and
require that broadcasters’ primary free
over-the-air Next Gen TV video
114 At the time of this Order, only one such signal
type is standardized and mentioned within the
record, and it is described by ATSC A/322.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
5016
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
programming stream adhere to the
standard, for a period of five years from
the effective date of the rule
incorporating this standard. In the Next
Gen TV NPRM, we sought comment on
whether to incorporate this component
of the physical layer into our rules.
Some commenters, including CTA, urge
us to incorporate A/322 to provide
certainty to television receiver
manufacturers and consumers that their
televisions will be able to receive Next
Gen TV signals. They suggest that A/322
is necessary to complete the definition
of the interference environment of Next
Gen TV as well as to protect consumers
and other stakeholders from purchasing
equipment that is unable to receive
over-the-air broadcasts. Some
broadcasters, however, claim that if we
require them to adhere to A/322, they
will not be able to innovate and offer
services other than fixed television
broadcasting. In an effort to balance our
goals of protecting consumers while
promoting innovation, we conclude that
requiring Next Gen TV broadcasters to
adhere to A/322 for an appropriate
transitional period, and only on their
primary video programming stream,
appropriately addresses the concerns
raised in the record and will best serve
the public interest.
95. Requiring Next Gen TV
broadcasters to broadcast their primary
video programming stream in
accordance with A/322 for a limited
period will benefit consumers and other
stakeholders. As LG explains, device
manufacturers and MVPDs may not be
able to reliably predict what signal
modulation a broadcaster is using
unless broadcasters are required to
follow A/322. This uncertainty could
cause manufacturers to inadvertently
build equipment that cannot receive
Next Gen TV broadcasts or could render
MVPDs unable to receive and retransmit
the signals of Next Gen TV stations.
These outcomes would harm
consumers. We note that although NAB
was originally opposed to the
Commission adopting A/322, more
recently it has acknowledged that
‘‘adopting the full physical layer of the
Next Gen standard, including A/322’’
may ‘‘ensure that consumer electronics
manufacturers can build television
receivers with confidence.’’ One of the
primary reasons we adopted the ATSC
1.0 standard for DTV was ‘‘to ensure
that all affected parties have sufficient
confidence and certainty in order to
promote the smooth introduction of a
free and universally available digital
broadcast television service.’’ 115 We
115 The issues we address here are similar to those
faced in the Fourth DTV Report and Order. At that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
similarly find here that adopting A/322,
with the limitations set forth herein, is
necessary to ensure adequate certainty
with respect to the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0.
96. We are persuaded, however, that
it is not appropriate at this time to
require broadcasters to adhere to A/322
indefinitely. As the record indicates, the
ATSC 3.0 standard could evolve, and
stagnant Commission rules could
prevent broadcasters from taking
advantage of that evolution. NAB
proposes, with respect to the one free
over-the-air video programming stream
that Next Gen TV broadcasters will be
required to provide, ‘‘that broadcasters
rely on both components of the physical
layer, that is, A/321 and A/322,’’ and
that the ‘‘requirement to incorporate
A/322 sunset automatically after a
period of three years unless extended by
the Commission following a rulemaking
proceeding.’’ We agree with the basic
principle of NAB’s proposal. In
particular, we agree that the
Commission ‘‘. . . can provide the
certainty the consumer electronics
industry desires with the flexibility
broadcasters seek while minimizing
regulatory burdens’’ by incorporating
A/322 into our rules for a transitional
period. After that transitional period,
the requirement will sunset if it is not
reinstated by the Commission via
rulemaking before the end of the
transitional period.116
97. We conclude that five years, rather
than three years, is the appropriate
amount of time to require broadcasters
to use the A/322 standard for their
primary video programming stream.
Three years, as proposed by NAB,
would sunset the requirement within (or
only shortly after) the incentive auction
repacking period and likely before many
stations have had a reasonable
opportunity to implement Next Gen TV
broadcasting. We find that a time and
scope-limited adoption of A/322 strikes
an appropriate balance of all interests
time, we based our decision to adopt and
incorporate the ATSC 1.0 standard upon four goals:
(1) To ensure that all affected parties have sufficient
confidence and certainty in order to promote the
smooth introduction of a free and universally
available digital broadcast television service; (2) to
increase the availability of new products and
services to consumers through the introduction of
digital broadcasting; (3) to ensure that our rules
encourage technological innovation and
competition; and (4) to minimize regulation and
assure that any regulations we do adopt remain in
effect no longer than necessary.
116 We will also use this period to monitor how
the marketplace handles patent royalties for
essential patents, but we will not require reasonable
and non-discriminatory (RAND) licensing at this
time. With no evidence of patent licensing issues,
we believe it is premature to impose regulations on
the private licensing marketplace.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
reflected in the record. Our approach
will let broadcasters develop new
ancillary services outside the
boundaries of A/322. It will also
establish a period of certainty for
manufacturers, MVPDs, and consumers
that will prevent broadcasting standards
from splintering and will speed the
overall adoption of ATSC 3.0. Requiring
Next Gen TV broadcasters to use A/322
only with respect to the primary video
programming stream leaves significant
ability for broadcasters to innovate with
regard to ancillary services. Thus, we
conclude that the requirement that
broadcasters adhere to the A/322
standard requirement will sunset five
years from its effective date (i.e., the
date it is published in the Federal
Register), unless the Commission
extends the requirement via rulemaking.
98. We find that the benefits of
requiring broadcasters’ primary video
programming stream to adhere to A/322
outweigh the burdens, particularly
because A/322 gives broadcasters many
choices. As commenters explain, the
A/322 standard enables a significant
amount of broadcaster flexibility,
allowing broadcasters to choose from
tens of thousands of different robustness
operating points. The parameters that
determine these operating points allow
broadcasters to customize the payload,
interference susceptibility, and mobile
performance of their primary video
signal, and allow broadcasters to design
their signals to support a range that
extends all the way from very robust
mobile video to very high quality UltraHigh Definition and High Dynamic
Range video. In addition, we are not
adopting at this time any of the other
ATSC 3.0 standards, so broadcasters
that choose to deploy Next Gen TV
service will have considerable flexibility
to innovate.
99. We disagree with suggestions,
however, that incorporating A/322 into
our rules is necessary to make
interference calculations more certain
and predictable. LG and others assert
that A/321 defines only a small portion
of the ATSC 3.0 RF waveform, but an
engineering study performed by MSW
showed that the A/322 waveform is
sufficiently noise-like to be considered
in the interference environment in the
same the way the DTV waveform is. So
we expect that any coded orthogonal
frequency-division multiplexing signal
likely to be used by broadcasters,117 as
accommodated by the A/321 bootstrap
signal, will be noise-like. We agree with
117 Coded orthogonal frequency-division
multiplexing, or COFDM, is the scheme used to
modulate ATSC 3.0 signals. It replaces the 8–VSB
modulation scheme upon which the ATSC 1.0
standard relies.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
NAB’s suggestion that ‘‘. . . the
Commission should seek to minimize
regulatory burdens by requiring only
that any digital transmissions are
randomized and noise like and do not
cause harmful interference by staying
within the constraints of Section
73.622(h) of the Commission’s rules.’’
Therefore, ATSC 3.0 signals are
prohibited from causing harmful
interference under 47 CFR 73.622(h)
regardless of whether we require
broadcasters to adhere to A/322.
100. Although ONE Media argues that
requiring broadcasters to adhere to A/
322 will limit the mobile reception
performance of the ATSC 3.0 standard,
the record suggests that this concern is
overstated. LG performed mobile
reception tests pursuant to an ATSC 3.0
experimental license, and the report
resulting from those tests indicates that
the ATSC 3.0 standard, including A/
322, allows for ‘‘[h]ighly reliable invehicle mobile reception.’’ Although the
Commission has limited data to rely on
at this time, it appears that the
performance of the ATSC 3.0 standard
will allow broadcasters to confidently
implement mobile services, even while
they adhere to A/322. Moreover,
because we require broadcasters to
adhere to A/322 only with respect to the
primary video programming stream that
the Next Gen TV broadcaster transmits,
broadcasters will be able to innovate
outside the bounds of A/322 with the
rest of the spectrum they are licensed to
use.
2. Service and Interference Protections
101. In this section, we adopt the
service and interference protection rules
that we proposed in the Next Gen TV
NPRM. In the NPRM, we raised three
potential interference issues with
respect to the adoption of the ATSC 3.0
transmission standard: (1) Interference
caused by ATSC 3.0 signals to ATSC 1.0
(DTV) signals, (2) interference caused by
DTV or ATSC 3.0 signals to other ATSC
3.0 signals, and (3) interference-related
concerns arising with respect to ATSC
3.0 signals and non-television services
that operate within or adjacent to the TV
band. We proposed to use the same
technical parameters as we use for DTV
signals when evaluating interference
caused by or from an ATSC 3.0 signal.
We also proposed to update our rules to
allow updated population inputs when
evaluating a broadcaster’s application
for a new or modified facility.
a. Interference Protection of ATSC 1.0
(DTV) Signals
102. As we proposed in the Next Gen
TV NPRM, we will use our existing
methodology and planning factors to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
calculate how ATSC 3.0 signals will
interfere with ATSC 1.0 signals. In the
NPRM, we proposed to apply the
methodology and planning factors
specified in OET Bulletin No. 69 to
calculate interference from ATSC 3.0 to
DTV signals, and we sought comment
on whether DTV operations would be
sufficiently protected by the OET
Bulletin No. 69 methodology and
planning factors when applied to
interference predictions from ATSC 3.0
signals. The Petition included
laboratory measurements that suggested
that RF emission mask and effective
radiated power limits for the ATSC 3.0
signal could remain unchanged from
existing limits for DTV signals. Based on
those measurements, we proposed to
calculate interference from ATSC 3.0
signals in accordance with 47 CFR
73.622, 73.623 and 74.703 and as
implemented by OET Bulletin No. 69.
We solicited specific measurement
results in response to the Petitioners’
claim that ATSC 3.0 and DTV signals
should be considered equivalent in
terms of potential interference to DTV
signals, but received no additional
reports or measurements to either
support or refute the claim that ATSC
3.0 signals could be treated the same as
DTV signals when considering
interference from ATSC 3.0 to DTV
signals. However, all commenters who
addressed the issue supported our
proposed approach, and no alternative
methodologies or planning factors were
proposed. We accordingly adopt the use
of the methodology and planning factors
specified in Sections 73.622, 73.624 and
74.703 of the Commission’s rules and in
OET Bulletin No. 69 to calculate
interference from ATSC 3.0 to DTV
signals, and we make no modifications
to these rules or to the RF emission
mask and effective radiated power
limits.
b. Service and Interference Protection of
ATSC 3.0 Signals
103. We also adopt our proposals
regarding service and interference
protection of ATSC 3.0 signals; we will
use the same methodology and planning
factors defined for DTV when defining
the service area of an ATSC 3.0 signal
and define the ATSC 3.0 interference
criteria for co- and adjacent channel
interfering signals at the same levels as
specified in OET Bulletin No. 69 for
DTV signals. The DTV transmission
standard has fixed transmission and
error correction parameters and a single
associated minimum signal strength
threshold (or signal-to-noise-ratio/SNR
threshold) for service. The minimum
SNR threshold is used as a basis for
determining where a DTV broadcast
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5017
television station’s signal can be
received. Whether a DTV broadcast
television station is considered to have
service and receive protection from
interference is determined in part by
this threshold. The minimum expected
signal level for an ATSC 3.0 signal is
much more dynamic. The ATSC 3.0
standard enables broadcasters to choose
from multiple modulation and error
correction parameters, which have the
effect of allowing them to adjust data
rates and corresponding minimum SNR
thresholds. Further, ATSC 3.0 enables
broadcasters to transmit multiple
program streams with different
parameters simultaneously. This means
that, as a practical matter, the actual
area where the signal of a television
station broadcasting an ATSC 3.0 signal
can be received may not necessarily
match up to the same area defined by
the single minimum SNR threshold of
DTV. The SNR threshold for the ATSC
3.0 transmission standard will be
variable and station-specific, enabling
tradeoffs depending on each station’s
programming offerings and quality of
service goals. In consideration of the
dynamic nature of ATSC 3.0
transmission standard, our rules will
maintain the status quo for interference
protection and allow us to calculate the
coverage areas of ATSC 3.0 stations with
certainty. We discuss each aspect of
Service and Protection of ATSC 3.0
signals below.
(i) Preservation of Service
104. We require Next Gen TV
broadcasters to offer at least one free
ATSC 3.0 video programming stream
comparable to a DTV signal and to
provide a signal with a chosen
modulation/coding scheme that requires
a SNR of no more than would be
required of a DTV signal.118 This
requirement will preserve service to
existing OTA viewers, all else being
equal (i.e., an ATSC 3.0 transmission
from the same antenna, location, and
power level, received by equipment
with the same performance as a DTV
transmission will cover the same area as
a comparable DTV signal).
105. We adopt our proposal to
mandate Next Gen TV broadcasters to
offer at least one free ATSC 3.0 video
programming stream that requires a SNR
of no more than 15 dB (streams
requiring a lower SNR would also
118 OET Bulletin No. 69 defines service of a DTV
signal as those locations where the SNR is 15 or
greater. This would be the same threshold applied
to the free ATSC 3.0 video programming stream to
achieve a ‘‘DTV-equivalent’’ service.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5018
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
qualify).119 By adopting this
requirement, we guarantee that any
station beginning ATSC 3.0 operation
will continue to provide at least one free
video programming stream to viewers
within the ATSC 1.0-equivalent service
area who choose to upgrade their
receiver equipment to the Next Gen TV
standard. Generally, commenters
support this approach, but AT&T and
ATVA suggest that the proposal ‘‘does
not go far enough.’’ We believe that
mandating a lower threshold for ATSC
3.0 signals, as suggested by AT&T and
ATVA, is unnecessary because a lower
threshold would potentially encompass
a larger audience than an equivalent
DTV signal.120 At the same time, to the
extent that broadcasters want to offer a
video programming stream in the
manner suggested by AT&T and ATVA,
a signal with a 0 dB minimum SNR
would satisfy our requirement because 0
dB is less than the 15 dB service
threshold ceiling for minimum SNR
being adopted here. Therefore, we adopt
a SNR that balances the need for OTA
viewers throughout an ATSC 3.0
station’s contour to receive television
broadcast services when stations choose
to voluntarily transmit ATSC 3.0 signals
with the desire of broadcasters to
flexibly offer various programming
streams in ATSC 3.0 in addition to the
minimum single free program stream
required for DTV signals by 47 CFR
73.624.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
(ii) Next Gen TV Service Area
106. We will use the methodology and
planning factors defined in OET
Bulletin No. 69 to define an ATSC 3.0
‘‘DTV-equivalent’’ service area in which
the ATSC 3.0 signal is protected from
interference, as we proposed in the Next
Gen TV NPRM. Historically, we have
relied upon this methodology and these
planning factors to determine service for
DTV with satisfactory results, and many
commenters support the proposal. ONE
Media is the only commenter that does
not support the proposal, suggesting
that, ‘‘except for cases in which other
Commission rules require reference to a
service area (e.g., community of license
coverage), the Commission should
abandon efforts to define service areas
and instead should provide broadcasters
flexibility to deploy in whatever manner
119 The single free ATSC 3.0 video programming
stream must comply with the ATSC A/322 standard
for a period of five years from the date of
publication in the Federal Register.
120 Additionally, if an HD video stream requires
about 3 Mbps with ATSC 3.0, then assuming the
entire signal uses the 15 dB SNR value and thus
about 25 Mbps is available in total, then most of the
capacity of the signal would remain available,
therefore making the impact of this requirement
minimal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
the market demands.’’ We elect not to
adopt ONE Media’s proposal because
such a significant shift would not align
with the Commission’s current goal to
minimize the potential impact to
viewers of stations that voluntarily
choose to switch to ATSC 3.0.
(iii) Interference Protection
107. We will use a protection
threshold for Next Gen TV signals that
would provide an equivalent level of
protection as provided to a DTV signal,
as we proposed in the Next Gen TV
NPRM. Under this approach, an ATSC
3.0 signal will be protected from cochannel and adjacent channel
interference as defined in OET Bulletin
No. 69.121 Commenters generally
support the proposal to use the OET–69
thresholds to protect ATSC 3.0 signals
from interference. TV White space
proponents generally oppose any
protections that would allow
broadcasters to expand their service
areas beyond the existing DTV service
area definition. NAB states that ‘‘the
Commission need not consider
modifications to the methodology or
planning factors in OET–69.’’ One
Ministries requests that we ‘‘relax the
adjacent channel D/U ratio for all
receivers (not just ATSC 3.0 receivers)
to be 33 dB or higher,’’ but no other
commenters discuss this issue. Public
Interest Groups support maintaining the
existing interference protections and
oppose any expansion of the service
area.
108. We have not been given
sufficient information to conclude, nor
do we have any reason to believe, that
ATSC 3.0 receivers will perform any
differently than DTV receivers perform
today. In addition, as discussed above,
the measurement tests provided by the
Petitioners, while performed on DTV
receivers, demonstrate that the adjacent
channel emissions of ATSC 3.0 signals
are equivalent, and therefore are not
expected to reduce the sensitivity of
ATSC 3.0 receivers. Adopting the same
interference protection requirements as
we have today will provide regulatory
certainty while broadcasters voluntarily
deploy ATSC 3.0. Nevertheless, if we
121 The threshold levels at which interference is
considered to occur are: (i) For co-channel stations,
the D/U ratio is + 15 dB. This value is only valid
at locations where the signal-to-noise ratio is 28 dB
or greater. At the edge of the noise-limited service
area, where the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio is 16 dB,
this value is + 23 dB. At locations where the S/N
ratio is greater than 16 dB but less than 28 dB, D/
U values are computed from the following formula:
D/U = 15 + 10log10[1.0/(1.0¥10¥x/10)] Where x
= S/N–15.19 (minimum signal to noise ratio) (ii) For
interference from a lower first-adjacent channel, the
D/U ratio is ¥28 dB. (iii) For interference from an
upper first-adjacent channel, the D/U ratio is ¥26
dB.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
receive additional information or
conduct our own receiver tests, we may
revisit whether either the co-channel or
adjacent channel interference protection
criteria for ATSC 3.0 should be any
different from the interference
protections provided for DTV in OET
Bulletin No. 69.
c. Interference Protection Affecting
Other Services
109. We do not revise our current
interference-related rules with respect to
the other services in the TV band or
adjacent bands. In the Next Gen TV
NPRM, we sought comment on whether
there would be any interference-related
issues that arise with respect to services
and operations in the TV Band other
than those of full-power, Class A, LPTV
and TV translator stations, as well as
whether there could be any such issues
in other adjacent bands. The record
reflects that as long as the emission
mask, power limits, and the
methodology and protection criteria in
OET Bulletin No. 69 are maintained, no
rule changes are necessary to protect
full-power, Class A, LPTV and TV
translator services. National Public
Radio (NPR) raised concerns about
potential interference between ATSC 3.0
transmissions on TV channel 6 and FM
band operations. But as the Petitioners
explain, the ATSC 3.0 emission mask
will remain unchanged,122 and therefore
we see no need to require additional
protections for TV channel 6 adjacent to
the FM broadcast service. We also reject
the Wi-Fi Alliance’s requests to protect
only the primary video programming
stream of ATSC 3.0 signals and avoid
requirements to protect single frequency
networks (SFNs). White space devices
(WSDs) must protect the television
service, as defined by current rules,
regardless of how many streams are
being offered or which stream is
primary, just as WSDs are required to
protect the multiple DTV programming
streams that many television stations
offer today. In addition, to the extent
that a DTV station makes a request
today to deploy a distributed
transmission system (DTS) or SFN,
WSDs must continue to protect those
licensed service areas. No comments
were filed with respect to potential
interference-related issues pertaining to
LPAS or unlicensed wireless
microphones operating in the TV bands,
or with respect to WMTS or RAS
122 Specifically, the report indicates that RF
emission mask characteristics will remain
unchanged for Next Gen TV, that effective radiated
power limits for stations may be retained to
maintain protections for co-channel and adjacent
channel interference, and that its modulation
characteristics are inherently noise-like.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
services in the adjacent band, and
therefore, as proposed, we do not adopt
any changes to those rules.
d. Station Interference Protection
Population Inputs
110. We adopt the rule change we
proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM to
evaluate interference that will result
from applications for new or modified
facilities using the latest official U.S.
Census figures.123 The Commission has
calculated the degree of permissible
interference to populations served based
on the 2000 U.S. Census population
data with one exception: For purposes
of the incentive auction and repacking
process, the Commission uses 2010 U.S.
Census population data for interference
calculations. We conclude that it is most
reasonable to rely on the most up-todate U.S. Census information for these
calculations, an approach that the D.C.
Circuit upheld in its decision to allow
the Commission to apply 2010 U.S.
census population during the incentive
auction. We update our rules to permit
the Media Bureau to use the most recent
U.S. Census statistics. We direct the
Media Bureau to announce when
updated U.S. Census statistics have
been incorporated into our licensing
systems and the date upon which such
updated inputs will be applied at least
60 days before they are used for
application processing purposes. Thus,
after the repacking process is complete,
any broadcast television service or
interference calculations will be based
on 2010 U.S. Census statistics, until
after 2020, when the next U.S. Census
statistics are scheduled to become
available and the Media Bureau
subsequently announces the date of
application of such data.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
3. Next Gen TV Single Frequency
Networks (SFNs)
111. As proposed in the Next Gen TV
NPRM, we conclude that broadcast
television stations may operate ATSC
3.0 Single Frequency Networks (SFNs)
pursuant to our current rules
authorizing Distributed Transmission
Systems (DTS). Commenters support the
authorization of SFNs for Next Gen TV
broadcasters, and emphasize the
importance of such networks to the
successful deployment of ATSC 3.0
broadcasting. We also adopt our
proposal to require that all transmitters
under a single DTS license follow the
same broadcast television transmission
standard. Finally, as proposed, we
123 The Bureau will incorporate the statistics as
they become available and it is able to incorporate
the statistics into the Commission’s licensing
processing systems.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
decline to adopt a synchronization
standard specific to ATSC 3.0.
112. As explained in the Next Gen TV
NPRM, broadcasters traditionally have
used a single transmission site, and
have provided fill-in service using
separately licensed secondary
transmission sites that typically use
different RF channels. However, a
broadcaster using a DTS provides
television service to its area by two or
more transmission sites using an
identical signal on the same RF channel,
synchronized to manage selfinterference.124 The rules established in
the DTS Report and Order describe the
authorized service area, maximum
service area, station reference point,
coverage determination, protection from
interference, and application
requirements for DTS stations.
113. Commenters claim that
broadcasters that deploy ATSC 3.0 will
have the ability to efficiently form SFNs,
which for the purposes of broadcast
television is a term that is synonymous
with DTS. No commenters oppose the
idea that broadcasters that opt to deploy
ATSC 3.0 should be able to use SFNs.
MWG points out that ATSC 3.0 ‘‘uses a
form of modulation that is designed to
support SFNs in DTS-style operations,’’
and that ‘‘. . . with ATSC 3.0, signals
from several transmitters can be allowed
to overlap, and the overlap can be
compensated. Indeed, the overlap can
help to improve reception.’’ The record
thus suggests that providing
broadcasters with the ability to use
SFNs has the potential to make Next
Gen TV services more robust.
114. We adopt our tentative
conclusion in the Next Gen TV NPRM
that the rules the Commission already
has established to authorize a DTS
station generally are adequate to
authorize an ATSC 3.0 SFN station.
Several commenters request that we
amend the service area rules applicable
to DTS to enable Next Gen TV stations
to expand the area that an ATSC 3.0
SFN license could cover. Other
commenters oppose changes to the
124 Radio waves require a certain amount of time
to travel any given distance. In the case of a DTS
network, this means that a location in the service
area of the station will most likely receive the
signals from the different transmitters at different
times, because the transmitters are different
distances away from that location. TV receivers are
typically designed to handle a certain range of time
differences to accommodate signal reflections. If a
received DTS time difference falls outside that
range, to the receiver the signals appear to be cochannel interference. Because the timing difference
is predictable based on distance, precise
synchronization of the signals from the different
transmitters allows a station to offset the broadcast
times with high precision, so that the areas where
large timing differences occur can be redirected to
low-impact regions.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5019
current service area rules without
further public comment. The record
generally does not address the technical
complexities that could be raised if we
adopt this proposal or the effect that
changes to authorized DTS service areas
could have on any of our other rules
that depend on station service areas.
While we recognize that the changes
suggested by commenters could
potentially facilitate Next Gen TV
deployment, no commenters state that
the proposed changes are necessary for
broadcasters to begin using SFNs with
the ATSC 3.0 standard. As such, we find
that the record does not support changes
to the authorized service areas for Next
Gen TV SFNs, and we decline to make
any such changes at this time. The
Commission will monitor the
deployment of ATSC 3.0 in the
marketplace and will reconsider this
issue in the future if appropriate.125
115. We also adopt our tentative
conclusion that there is no need to
implement a specific synchronization
standard for ATSC 3.0 SFNs. In the DTS
Report and Order, the Commission
found that it was not necessary for a
DTS station to use a specific
synchronization system as long as (1)
the synchronization used by a station is
effective in minimizing interference
within the system, (2) the station
otherwise provides service to the
population within its service area
consistent with Commission rules, and
(3) the station complies with the
technical standard adopted by the
Commission. Thus, although ATSC had
developed the A/110 ‘‘ATSC Standard
for Transmitter Synchronization,’’ the
Commission determined that it was not
necessary to incorporate this standard
into our rules and that DTS stations
should have flexibility with regard to
transmitter synchronization. We agree
with commenters that we should take
the same approach for ATSC 3.0 SFNs,
and note that no commenters contested
our proposal to adopt this approach. As
MWG explains, ‘‘there are many ways in
which such synchronization can be
obtained, and while the ATSC has
developed an approach to transmitter
synchronization that is being
standardized to facilitate interoperation
of equipment obtained from different
manufacturers, there is no reason for the
Commission to constrain the choices
that a broadcaster can make.’’ 126
125 We note that stations that are interested in
pursuing a change to their DTS service area may file
for waiver of our DTS rules pursuant to our general
waiver standard.
126 We also note that the A/322 standard, which
we incorporate into our rules, does not include a
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
Continued
02FER2
5020
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
116. Finally, we adopt our proposed
rule to require all DTS transmitters
under the same license to follow the
same digital television broadcasting
transmission standard. No one
commented on this proposal. This
simple measure is meant to ensure that
stations do not attempt to mix ATSC 1.0
and ATSC 3.0 transmissions within a
DTS network. Doing so would introduce
significant self-interference within the
station’s service area and would be
harmful to consumers.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Final Paperwork Reduction Act
Analysis
117. This document contains new
information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA).127 The requirements will
be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under section 3507(d) of the
PRA. OMB, the general public, and
other Federal agencies will be invited to
comment on the information collection
requirements contained in this
proceeding. The Commission will
publish a separate document in the
Federal Register at a later date seeking
these comments. In addition, we note
that pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002
(SBPRA),128 we previously sought
specific comment on how the
Commission might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
B. Congressional Review Act
118. The Commission will send a
copy of this Report and Order in a
report to be sent to Congress and the
Government Accountability Office,
pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act.129
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
C. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
119. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this
proceeding. The Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) sought written public
comment on the proposals in the NPRM,
synchronization standard, nor does it implicate any
specific synchronization standards.
127 The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104–13, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified
in Chapter 35 of title 44 U.S.C.).
128 The Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002 (SBPRA), Public Law 107–198, 116 Stat. 729
(2002) (codified in Chapter 35 of title 44 U.S.C.).
See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
129 See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
including comment on the IRFA. The
Commission received one comment on
the IRFA, while some other commenters
discussed the effect of the proposals on
smaller entities, as discussed below.
This present Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
120. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Report and Order. In summary, we
authorize television broadcasters to use
the ‘‘Next Generation’’ broadcast
television (Next Gen TV) transmission
standard, also called ‘‘ATSC 3.0’’ or
‘‘3.0,’’ on a voluntary, market-driven
basis. This authorization is subject to
broadcasters continuing to deliver
current-generation digital television
(DTV) service, using the ATSC 1.0
transmission standard, also called
‘‘ATSC 1.0’’ or ‘‘1.0,’’ to their viewers.
The Report and Order adopts rules that
will afford broadcasters flexibility to
deploy Next Gen TV service, while
minimizing the impact on, and costs to,
consumers and other industry
stakeholders.
121. Summary of Significant Issues
Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA. NTCA was the only party
to file comments in direct response to
the IRFA. NTCA’s comments focused on
two key burdens it says will be imposed
on its members and other small MVPDs
as a result of broadcasters’ voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0 service. First,
NTCA contends that small MVPDs will
bear the significant costs associated
with 3.0 carriage (even if carriage of 3.0
signals is not mandatory) because
broadcasters will be able to use their
market power to compel small MVPDs
to carry 3.0 signals through the
retransmission consent process. To
address this issue, NTCA requests that
we prohibit carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals
via retransmission consent. Second,
NTCA contends that small MVPDs will
bear costs associated with carriage of 1.0
simulcast signals which are moved to a
host station’s facility. Finally, NTCA
argues that the IRFA is ‘‘deficient’’
because ‘‘it provides no estimates of
expenses or burdens that small MVPDs
may encounter as a result of ATSC 1.0
simulcasting.’’
122. The R&O responds to these
arguments proffered by NTCA and other
small MVPDs. First, the R&O makes
clear that MVPDs are under no statutory
or regulatory obligation to carry any 3.0
signals.130 Because MVPDs are not
obligated by rule or law to carry ATSC
3.0 signals, any costs to MVPDs of 3.0
carriage are voluntary. Thus, the rules
adopted do not impose direct costs on
130 The Report and Order also reminds parties of
the statutory requirement that they negotiate in
good faith.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
MVPDs. In addition, the R&O concludes
that it is premature to address any
issues that may arise with respect to the
voluntary carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals
before broadcasters begin transmitting
in ATSC 3.0.131 Therefore, the R&O
declines to adopt any new rules
regarding retransmission consent in this
proceeding and will allow these issues
at the outset to be addressed through
marketplace negotiations. Second, the
R&O observes that, under the existing
must-carry rules, broadcasters are
required to bear the costs of delivering
a good quality 1.0 signal to MVPDs. This
remains true for stations relocating their
1.0 simulcast channel to a host facility.
The existing rules, however, do not
apply to the costs on MVPDs of
receiving and redistributing the signal to
their subscribers and so MVPDs
generally assume these costs. Such costs
are generally viewed as the costs of
doing business as MVPDs. The R&O
does not change this understanding. The
R&O finds that the costs incurred due to
local simulcasting will occur on a
market-driven basis and are properly
borne by the MVPDs. Finally, we
disagree with NTCA’s claim that the
IRFA was deficient, but respond to this
claim in Section F. of this FRFA because
it relates to the sufficiency of the
alternatives considered to minimize
costs and burdens on small MVPDs.
123. Response to Comments by the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration. The Chief
Counsel did not file any comments in
response to the proposed rules in this
proceeding.
124. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply. The types of
small entities that may be affected by
the R&O fall within the following
categories: (1) Wired
Telecommunications Carriers; Cable
Companies and Systems (Rate
Regulation); (2) Cable System Operators
(Telecom Act Standard); (3) Direct
Broadcast Satellite Service; (4) Satellite
Master Antenna Television (SMATV)
Systems, also known as Private Cable
Operators (PCOs); (5) Home Satellite
Dish (HSD) Service, (6) Open Video
Services; (7) Wireless Cable Systems—
Broadband Radio Service and
131 We note that no data is available to quantify
the costs associated with ATSC 3.0 carriage. See
ATVA Comments at 10 (‘‘Unlike the costs
associated with ATSC 1.0 simulcasts, MVPDs
cannot yet quantify the costs associated with ATSC
3.0 carriage. Much of the necessary equipment does
not yet exist.’’). Although ATVA speculates that
‘‘broadcasters will insist on ATSC 3.0 carriage once
the Commission adopts ATSC 3.0 rules,’’ ATVA
representatives explain that to date, they have
generally been able to reach agreements that
delayed immediate carriage of ATSC 3.0.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Educational Broadband Service; (8)
Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers
(ILECs) and Small Incumbent Local
Exchange Carriers; Radio and Television
Broadcasting and Wireless
Communications Equipment
Manufacturing; (9) Audio and Video
Equipment Manufacturing; (10) and
Television Broadcasting.
125. Description of Projected
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements. Because the
deployment of ATSC 3.0 service by Next
Gen TV stations is purely voluntary, the
rules related to the provision of 3.0
service apply only to stations who
choose to participate. That is, there are
no new mandatory reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements for stations that choose
not to participate. For broadcasters that
choose to deploy ATSC 3.0 service,
there are reporting, recordkeeping, or
other compliance requirements. Stations
that elect to broadcast using the Next
Gen TV standard must (1) provide one
free, over-the-air video stream broadcast
in ATSC 3.0; (2) air a local simulcast of
the primary video programming stream
of their ATSC 3.0 channel in ATSC 1.0
format; must file an application to
modify its license with the Commission,
and receive prior Commission approval,
before: (a) Moving its 1.0 signal to a
temporary simulcast host station or
moving its 1.0 simulcast to a different
host station; (b) commencing the airing
of a 3.0 channel on a 3.0 host station
(that has already converted to 3.0
operation) or moving its 3.0 channel to
a different host station; or (c) converting
its existing station to 3.0 technology or
from 3.0 back to 1.0; and (4) file the
appropriate schedule(s) to FCC Form
2100 and must provide a copy of the
local simulcasting agreement to the
Commission upon request.
126. Steps Taken to Minimize
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities and Significant Alternatives
Considered. The Commission
considered but declined to adopt certain
alternatives suggested by MVPDs to (1)
negotiate for carriage of 3.0 signals
separately from carriage of 1.0 signals;
(2) nullify existing contractual clauses
that would require MVPDs to carry 3.0
signals; (3) in the event of a good faith
complaint, subpoena negotiation-related
documents under a protective order to
overcome any non-disclosure
provisions; (4) prohibit carriage of ATSC
3.0 signals via retransmission consent.
127. The R&O declines to adopt a
Next Gen TV (ATSC 3.0) tuner mandate.
In deciding to rely on market forces in
lieu of the alternative of a tuner
mandate, the Order lessens potential
burdens that equipment manufacturers,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
including small entities, otherwise
might face. When making this
determination, the Commission
considered arguments raised by parties
like ATBA who supported the
alternative of a tuner mandate for all
television receivers, including
smartphones and other mobile devices,
but ultimately agreed with those
commenters who argued consumer
demand will drive the inclusion of
ATSC 3.0 tuners in television receivers.
128. Report to Congress: The
Commission will send a copy of this
R&O in a report to be sent to Congress
and the Government Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
129. It is ordered, pursuant to the
authority found in Sections 1, 4, 7, 301,
303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b),
336, 338, 399b, 403, 614, and 615 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 157, 301,
303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b),
336, 338, 399b, 403, 534, and 535, this
Report and Order is hereby adopted,
effective thirty (30) days after the date
of publication in the Federal Register.
130. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s rules are hereby amended
as set forth in Appendix B and will
become effective 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register,
except for 47 CFR 73.3801, 73.6029, and
74.782 which contain new or modified
information collection requirements that
require approval by the OMB under the
PRA and which shall become effective
after the Commission publishes a notice
in the Federal Register announcing
OMB approval and the effective date of
the rules.
131. It is further ordered that,
pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 155(c), the Chief,
Media Bureau, is granted delegated
authority for the narrow purpose of
amending FCC Form 2100 as necessary
to implement the licensing process
adopted herein.
132. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Report and Order, including the
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment,
Computer technology.
47 CFR Part 73
Communications equipment,
Incorporation by reference, Television.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5021
47 CFR Part 74
Communications equipment,
Television.
47 CFR Part 76
Cable television.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR parts 15,
73, 74, and 76 as set forth below:
PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY
DEVICES
1. The authority citation for part 15
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304,
307, 336, 544a, and 549.
2. Amend § 15.117 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 15.117
TV broadcast receivers.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) TV broadcast receivers shall be
capable of adequately receiving all
channels allocated by the Commission
to the television broadcast service that
broadcast digital signals using the DTV
transmission standard in § 73.682(d) of
this chapter, but need not be capable of
receiving analog signals or signals using
the Next Gen TV transmission standard
in § 73.682(f) of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
3. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 309, 310,
334, 336, and 339.
4. Amend § 73.616 by revising
paragraph (e)(1) introductory text and
adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
■
§ 73.616 Post-transition DTV station
interference protection.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) For evaluating compliance with
the requirements of this paragraph,
interference to populations served is to
be predicted based on the most recent
official decennial U.S. Census
population data as identified by the
Media Bureau in a Public Notice issued
not less than 60 days prior to use of the
data for a specific year in application
processing, and otherwise according to
the procedure set forth in OET Bulletin
No. 69: ‘‘Longley-Rice Methodology for
Evaluating TV Coverage and
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5022
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Interference’’ (February 6, 2004)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 73.8000), including population served
within service areas determined in
accordance with § 73.622(e),
consideration of whether F(50,10)
undesired signals will exceed the
following desired-to-undesired (D/U)
signal ratios, assumed use of a
directional receiving antenna, and use
of the terrain dependent Longley-Rice
point-to-point propagation model.
Applicants may request the use of a cell
size other than the default of 2.0 km per
side, but only requests for cell sizes of
1.0 km per side or 0.5 km per side will
be considered. The threshold levels at
which interference is considered to
occur are:
*
*
*
*
*
(g) The interference protection
requirements contained in this section
apply to television station operations
under both the DTV transmission
standard in § 73.682(d) and the Next
Gen TV transmission standard in
§ 73.682(f).
■ 5. Amend § 73.624 by adding
paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:
§ 73.624 Digital television broadcast
stations.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) DTV licensees or permittees that
choose to broadcast an ATSC 3.0 signal
(using the Next Gen TV transmission
standard in § 73.682(f)) shall transmit at
least one free over the air video
programming stream on that signal that
requires at most the signal threshold of
a comparable received DTV signal. DTV
licensees or permittees that choose to
broadcast an ATSC 3.0 signal (using the
Next Gen TV transmission standard in
§ 73.682(f)) shall also simulcast the
primary video programming stream on
its ATSC 3.0 signal by broadcasting an
ATSC 1.0 signal (using the DTV
transmission standard in § 73.682(d))
from another broadcast television
facility within its local market in
accordance with the local simulcasting
requirement in §§ 73.3801, 73.6029 and
74.782 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 73.626 by adding
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
§ 73.626 DTV distributed transmission
systems.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) All transmitters operating under a
single DTS license must follow the same
digital broadcast television transmission
standard.
■ 7. Amend § 73.682 by adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
§ 73.682
TV transmission standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Next Gen TV broadcast television
transmission standard authorized. (1)
As an alternative to broadcasting only
an ATSC 1.0 signal using the DTV
transmission standard set forth in
paragraph (d) of this section, DTV
licensees or permittees may choose to
broadcast an ATSC 3.0 signal using the
Next Gen TV transmission standard set
forth in this paragraph (f), provided it
also broadcasts a simulcast signal in
ATSC 1.0 (using the DTV transmission
standard in § 73.682(d)).
(2) Effective March 5, 2018,
transmission of Next Gen TV broadcast
television (ATSC 3.0) signals shall
comply with the standards for such
transmissions set forth in ATSC A/
321:2016, ‘‘System Discovery and
Signaling’’ (March 23, 2016)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 73.8000). To the extent that virtual
channels (specified in the DTV
transmission standard referenced in
ATSC A/65C:2006 in paragraph (d) of
this section) are used in the
transmission of Next Gen TV
broadcasting, major channel numbers
shall be assigned as required by ATSC
A/65C:2006 Annex B (incorporated by
reference, see § 73.8000). In addition,
until February 2, 2023, such signals
shall also comply with the standards set
forth in ATSC A/322:2017 ‘‘Physical
Layer Protocol’’ (June 6, 2017)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 73.8000) with respect to the
transmission of at least one free over the
air primary video programming stream.
■ 8. Add § 73.3801 to subpart H to read
as follows:
§ 73.3801 Full power television
simulcasting during the ATSC 3.0 (Next Gen
TV) transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. For
purposes of compliance with the
simulcasting requirement in paragraph
(b) of this section, a full power
television station may partner with one
or more other full power stations or
with one or more Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator stations in a simulcasting
arrangement for purposes of airing
either an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on a host station’s (i.e., a station whose
facilities are being used to transmit
programming originated by another
station) facilities. Noncommercial
educational television stations may
participate in simulcasting
arrangements with commercial stations.
(1) A full power television station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on the facilities of a Class A host station
must comply with the rules governing
power levels and interference applicable
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
to Class A stations, and must comply in
all other respects with the rules and
policies applicable to full power
television stations set forth in this part.
(2) A full power television station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on the facilities of a low power
television or TV translator host station
must comply with the rules of part 74
of this chapter governing power levels
and interference applicable to low
power television or TV translator
stations, and must comply in all other
respects with the rules and policies
applicable to full power television
stations set forth in this part.
(3) A full power noncommercial
educational television (NCE) station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on the facilities of a commercial
television host station must comply
with the rules applicable to NCE
licensees.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. A full
power television station that chooses to
air an ATSC 3.0 signal must simulcast
the primary video programming stream
of that signal in an ATSC 1.0 format.
This requirement does not apply to any
multicast streams aired on the ATSC 3.0
channel.
(1) The programming aired on the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
‘‘substantially similar’’ to that aired on
the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of
this section, ‘‘substantially similar’’
means that the programming must be
the same except for advertisements,
promotions for upcoming programs, and
programming features that are based on
the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0.
These enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geotargeted weather, targeted emergency
alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or
improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ‘‘wake up’’
ability and interactive program
features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible
by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g., 4K or
HDR); and
(iv) Personalization of programming
performed by the viewer and at the
viewer’s discretion. (2) For purposes of
paragraph (b)(1) of this section,
programming that airs at a different time
on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal than
on the primary video programming
stream of the ATSC 3.0 signal is not
considered ‘‘substantially similar.’’
(c) Coverage requirements for the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal. For full
power broadcasters that elect
temporarily to relocate their ATSC 1.0
signal to the facilities of a host station
for purposes of deploying ATSC 3.0
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
service (and that convert their existing
facilities to ATSC 3.0), the ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal must continue to cover
the station’s entire community of
license (i.e., the station must choose a
host from whose transmitter site the
Next Gen TV station will continue to
meet the community of license signal
requirement over its current community
of license, as required by § 73.625) and
the host station must be assigned to the
same Designated Market Area (DMA) as
the originating station (i.e., the station
whose programming is being
transmitted on the host station).
(d) Coverage requirements for ATSC
3.0 signals. For full power broadcasters
that elect to continue broadcasting in
ATSC 1.0 on the station’s existing
facilities and transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a host station,
the ATSC 3.0 signal must be established
on a host station assigned to the same
DMA as the originating station.
(e) Simulcasting agreements. (1)
Simulcasting agreements must contain
provisions outlining each licensee’s
rights and responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including
whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station’s
transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within
the host station’s channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair,
and modification of facilities, including
a list of all relevant equipment, a
description of each party’s financial
obligations, and any relevant notice
provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the
simulcast agreement may be terminated,
assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest station’s (i.e., a station
originating programming that is being
transmitted using the facilities of
another station) signal may be
transitioned off the host station.
(2) Broadcasters must maintain a
written copy of any simulcasting
agreement and provide it to the
Commission upon request.
(f) Licensing of simulcasting stations
and stations converting to ATSC 3.0
operation. (1) Each station participating
in a simulcasting arrangement pursuant
to this section shall continue to be
licensed and operated separately, have
its own call sign, and be separately
subject to all applicable Commission
obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC
1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the
facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels
of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the
originating station’s license identifying
any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being
aired on the facilities of a host station.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
The Commission will also include a
note on a host station’s license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
guest signal(s) being aired on the
facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. A full power
broadcaster must file an application
(FCC Form 2100) with the Commission,
and receive Commission approval,
before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the
facilities of a host station, moving that
signal from the facilities of an existing
host station to the facilities of a different
host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an
ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station (that has already converted
to ATSC 3.0 operation), moving its
ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a
different host station, or discontinuing
an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to
transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal or
converting the station from ATSC 3.0
back to ATSC 1.0 transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect
to any application in paragraph (f)(2) of
this section, a full power broadcaster
may file only an application for
modification of license, provided no
other changes are being requested in
such application that would require the
filing of an application for a
construction permit as otherwise
required by the rules (see, e.g.,
§ 73.1690).
(4) Host station. A host station must
first make any necessary changes to its
facilities before a guest station may file
an application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal
on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An
application filed in accordance with the
streamlined process in paragraph (f)(3)
of this section will receive expedited
processing provided, for stations
requesting to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on
the facilities of a host station, the station
will provide ATSC 1.0 service to at least
95 percent of the predicted population
within the noise limited service contour
of its original ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An
application in paragraph (f)(2) of this
section must include the following
information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if
applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host
station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating
broadcaster’s facility and the DMA of
the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed
necessary by the Commission to process
the application.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5023
(ii) If an application in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station, the
broadcaster must, in addition to the
information in paragraph (f)(6)(i), also
indicate on the application:
(A) The predicted population within
the noise limited service contour served
by the station’s original ATSC 1.0
signal;
(B) The predicted population within
the noise limited service contour served
by the station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal
that will lose the station’s ATSC 1.0
service as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas
of service loss by providing a contour
overlap map; and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signal aired on the host station will
serve at least 95 percent of the
population in paragraph (f)(6)(ii)(A) of
this section.
(iii)(A) If an application in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station and does not
meet the 95 percent standard in
paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of this section, the
application must contain, in addition to
the information in paragraphs (f)(6)(i)
and (ii) of this section, the following
information:
(1) Whether there is another possible
host station(s) in the market that would
result in less service loss to existing
viewers and, if so, why the Next Gen TV
broadcaster chose to partner with a host
station creating a larger service loss;
(2) What steps, if any, the station
plans to take to minimize the impact of
the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC
3.0 dongles, set-top boxes, or gateway
devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(3) The public interest benefits of the
simulcasting arrangement and a
showing of why the benefit(s) of
granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s).
(B) These applications will be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
(g) Consumer education for Next Gen
TV stations. (1) Commercial and
noncommercial educational stations
that relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g.,
moving to a host station’s facility,
subsequently moving to a different host,
or returning to its original facility) are
required to air daily Public Service
Announcements (PSAs) or crawls every
day for 30 days prior to the date that the
stations will terminate ATSC 1.0
operations on their existing facilities.
Stations that transition directly to ATSC
3.0 will be required to air daily PSAs or
crawls every day for 30 days prior to the
date that the stations will terminate
ATSC 1.0 operations.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
5024
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided
in the same language as a majority of the
programming carried by the
transitioning station and be closedcaptioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be
provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by
the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals or transitioning directly to ATSC
3.0, each PSA or crawl must provide all
pertinent information to consumers.
(h) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals (e.g., moving to a temporary host
station’s facilities, subsequently moving
to a different host, or returning to its
original facility) must provide notice to
MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry
the station’s ATSC 1.0 signal due to the
relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be
obligated to carry the station’s ATSC 1.0
signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section
must contain the following information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0
channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied
by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna
position, location, or power levels;
(iv) Stream identification information;
and
(v) Engineering staff contact
information.
(3) If any of the information in
paragraph (h)(2) of this section changes,
an amended notification must be sent.
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must
provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of
relocating their ATSC 1.0 signals if the
relocation occurs during the postincentive auction transition period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of
relocating their ATSC 1.0 signals if the
relocation occurs after the postincentive auction transition period (see
47 CFR 27.4).
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC
1.0 signal relocation changes, the station
must send a further notice to affected
MVPDs informing them of the new
anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose
whether to provide notice as required by
this section either by a letter notification
or electronically via email if the relevant
MVPD agrees to receive such notices by
email. Letter notifications to MVPDs
must be sent by certified mail, return
receipt requested to the MVPD’s address
in the FCC’s Online Public Inspection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have
an online file, notices must be sent to
the cable system’s official address of
record provided in the system’s most
recent filing in the FCC’s Cable
Operations and Licensing System
(COALS). For MVPDs with no official
address in OPIF or COALS, the letter
must be sent to the MVPD’s official
corporate address registered with their
State of incorporation.
■ 9. Add § 73.6029 to subpart J to read
as follows:
§ 73.6029 Class A television simulcasting
during the ATSC 3.0 (Next Gen TV)
transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. For
purposes of compliance with the
simulcasting requirement in paragraph
(b) of this section, a Class A television
station may partner with one or more
other Class A stations or with one or
more full power, LPTV, or TV translator
stations in a simulcasting arrangement
for purposes of airing either an ATSC
1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal on a host
station’s (i.e., a station whose facilities
are being used to transmit programming
originated by another station) facilities.
(1) A Class A television station airing
an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal on the
facilities of a full power host station
must comply with the rules of Part 73
of this chapter governing power levels
and interference, and must comply in
all other respects with the rules and
policies applicable to Class A television
stations, as set forth in this subpart.
(2) A Class A television station airing
an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal on the
facilities of a low power television or
TV translator host station must comply
with the rules of part 74 of this chapter
governing power levels and interference
that are applicable to low power
television or TV translator stations, and
must comply in all other respects with
the rules and policies applicable to
Class A television stations, as set forth
in this subpart.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. A Class
A television station that chooses to air
an ATSC 3.0 signal must simulcast the
primary video programming stream of
that signal in an ATSC 1.0 format. This
requirement does not apply to any
multicast streams aired on the ATSC 3.0
channel.
(1) The programming aired on the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
‘‘substantially similar’’ to that aired on
the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of
this section, ‘‘substantially similar’’
means that the programming must be
the same except for advertisements,
promotions for upcoming programs, and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
programming features that are based on
the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0.
These enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geotargeted weather, targeted emergency
alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or
improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ‘‘wake up’’
ability and interactive program
features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible
by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g., 4K or
HDR); and
(iv) Personalization of programming
performed by the viewer and at the
viewer’s discretion.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of
this section, programming that airs at a
different time on the ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal than on the primary
video programming stream of the ATSC
3.0 signal is not considered
‘‘substantially similar.’’
(c) Coverage requirements for the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal. For Class A
broadcasters that elect temporarily to
relocate their ATSC 1.0 signal to the
facilities of a host station for purposes
of deploying ATSC 3.0 service (and that
convert their existing facilities to ATSC
3.0), the station:
(1) Must maintain overlap between
the protected contour (§ 73.6010(c)) of
its existing signal and its ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal;
(2) May not relocate its ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal more than 30 miles
from the reference coordinates of the
relocating station’s existing antenna
location; and
(3) Must select a host station assigned
to the same DMA as the originating
station (i.e., the station whose
programming is being transmitted on
the host station).
(d) Coverage requirements for ATSC
3.0 signals. For Class A broadcasters
that elect to continue broadcasting in
ATSC 1.0 from the station’s existing
facilities and transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a host station,
the ATSC 3.0 signal must be established
on a host station assigned to the same
DMA as the originating station.
(e) Simulcasting agreements. (1)
Simulcasting agreements must contain
provisions outlining each licensee’s
rights and responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including
whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station’s
transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within
the host station’s channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair,
and modification of facilities, including
a list of all relevant equipment, a
description of each party’s financial
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
obligations, and any relevant notice
provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the
simulcast agreement may be terminated,
assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest station’s (i.e., a station
originating programming that is being
transmitted using the facilities of a host
station) signal may be transitioned off
the host station.
(2) Broadcasters must maintain a
written copy of any simulcasting
agreement and provide it to the
Commission upon request.
(f) Licensing of simulcasting stations
and stations converting to ATSC 3.0
operation. (1) Each station participating
in a simulcasting arrangement pursuant
to this section shall continue to be
licensed and operated separately, have
its own call sign, and be separately
subject to all applicable Commission
obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC
1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the
facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels
of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the
originating station’s license identifying
any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being
aired on the facilities of a host station.
The Commission will also include a
note on a host station’s license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
guest signal(s) being aired on the
facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. A Class A
broadcaster must file an application
(FCC Form 2100) with the Commission,
and receive Commission approval,
before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the
facilities of a host station, moving that
signal from the facilities of an existing
host station to the facilities of a different
host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an
ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station (that has already converted
to ATSC 3.0 operation), moving its
ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a
different host station, or discontinuing
an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to
transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal or
converting the station from ATSC 3.0
back to ATSC 1.0 transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect
to an application in paragraph (f)(2) of
this section, a Class A broadcaster may
file only an application for modification
of license provided no other changes are
being requested in such application that
would require the filing of an
application for a construction permit as
otherwise required by the rules (see,
e.g., § 73.1690).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
(4) Host station. A host station must
first make any necessary changes to its
facilities before a guest station may file
an application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal
on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An
application filed in accordance with the
streamlined process in paragraph (f)(3)
of this section will receive expedited
processing provided, for stations
requesting to air an ATSC signal on the
facilities of a host station, the station
will provide ATSC 1.0 service to at least
95 percent of the predicted population
within the noise limited service contour
of its original ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An
application in paragraph (f)(2) of this
section must include the following
information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if
applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host
station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating
broadcaster’s facility and the DMA of
the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed
necessary by the Commission to process
the application.
(ii) If an application in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station, the
broadcaster must, in addition to the
information in paragraph (f)(6)(i), also
indicate on the application:
(A) The predicted population within
the protected contour served by the
station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal;
(B) The predicted population within
the protected contour served by the
station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal that
will lose the station’s ATSC 1.0 service
as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas
of service loss by providing a contour
overlap map; and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signal aired on the host station will
serve at least 95 percent of the
population in paragraph (f)(6)(ii)(A) of
this section.
(iii)(A) If an application in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station and does not
meet the 95 percent standard in
paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of this section, the
application must contain, in addition to
the information in paragraphs (f)(6)(i)
and (ii) of this section, the following
information:
(1) Whether there is another possible
host station(s) in the market that would
result in less service loss to existing
viewers and, if so, why the Next Gen TV
broadcaster chose to partner with a host
station creating a larger service loss;
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5025
(2) What steps, if any, the station
plans to take to minimize the impact of
the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC
3.0 dongles, set-top boxes, or gateway
devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(3) The public interest benefits of the
simulcasting arrangement and a
showing of why the benefit(s) of
granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s).
(B) These applications will be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
(g) Consumer education for Next Gen
TV stations. (1) Class A stations that
relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g.,
moving to a host station’s facilities,
subsequently moving to a different host,
or returning to its original facility) will
be required to air daily Public Service
Announcements (PSAs) or crawls every
day for 30 days prior to the date that the
stations will terminate ATSC 1.0
operations on their existing facilities.
Stations that transition directly to ATSC
3.0 will be required to air daily PSAs or
crawls every day for 30 days prior to the
date that the stations will terminate
ATSC 1.0 operations.
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided
in the same language as a majority of the
programming carried by the
transitioning station and be closedcaptioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be
provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by
the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals or transitioning directly to ATSC
3.0, each PSA or crawl must provide all
pertinent information to consumers.
(h) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals (e.g., moving to a temporary host
station’s facilities, subsequently moving
to a different host, or returning to its
original facility) must provide notice to
MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry
the station’s ATSC 1.0 signal due to the
relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be
obligated to carry the station’s ATSC 1.0
signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section
must contain the following information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0
channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied
by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna
position, location, or power levels;
(iv) Stream identification information;
and
(v) Engineering staff contact
information.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5026
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(3) If any of the information in
paragraph (h)(2) of this section changes,
an amended notification must be sent.
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must
provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of
relocating their ATSC 1.0 signals if the
relocation occurs during the postincentive auction transition period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of
relocating their ATSC 1.0 signals if the
relocation occurs after the postincentive auction transition period.
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC
1.0 signal relocation changes, the station
must send a further notice to affected
MVPDs informing them of the new
anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose
whether to provide notice as required by
this section either by a letter notification
or electronically via email if the relevant
MVPD agrees to receive such notices by
email. Letter notifications to MVPDs
must be sent by certified mail, return
receipt requested to the MVPD’s address
in the FCC’s Online Public Inspection
File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have
an online file, notices may be sent to the
cable system’s official address of record
provided in the system’s most recent
filing in the FCC’s Cable Operations and
Licensing System (COALS). For MVPDs
with no official address in OPIF or
COALS, the letter must be sent to the
MVPD’s official corporate address
registered with their State of
incorporation.
10. Amend § 73.8000 by adding
paragraphs (b)(6) and (7) to read as
follows:
■
§ 73.8000
Incorporation by reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(6) ATSC A/321:2016, ‘‘System
Discovery and Signaling’’ (March 23,
2016), IBR approved for § 73.682.
(7) ATSC A/322:2017 ‘‘Physical Layer
Protocol’’ (June 6, 2017), IBR approved
for § 73.682.
*
*
*
*
*
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
PART 74—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO,
AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST
AND OTHER PROGRAM
DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES
11. The authority citation for part 74
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307,
309, 310, 336 and 554.
12. Add § 74.782 to subpart G to read
as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
§ 74.782 Low power television and TV
translator simulcasting during the ATSC 3.0
(Next Gen TV) transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. While
broadcasters are voluntarily deploying
ATSC 3.0, a low power television
(LPTV) or TV translator station may
partner with one or more other LPTV or
TV translator stations or with one or
more full power or Class A stations in
a simulcasting arrangement for purposes
of airing either an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC
3.0 signal on a host station’s (i.e., a
station whose facilities are being used to
transmit programming originated by
another station) facilities.
(1) An LPTV or TV translator station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on the facilities of a full power host
station must comply with the rules of
part 73 of this chapter governing power
levels and interference, and must
comply in all other respects with the
rules and policies applicable to low
power television or TV translator
stations set forth in this part.
(2) An LPTV or TV translator station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal
on the facilities of a Class A host station
must comply with the rules governing
power levels and interference applicable
to Class A television stations, and must
comply in all other respects with the
rules and policies applicable to LPTV or
TV translator stations as set forth in Part
74 of this chapter.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. An
LPTV or TV translator station that elects
voluntarily to simulcast while
broadcasters are voluntarily deploying
ATSC 3.0 must simulcast the primary
video programming stream of their
ATSC 3.0 signal in an ATSC 1.0 format.
This requirement does not apply to any
multicast streams aired on the ATSC 3.0
channel.
(1) The programming aired on the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
‘‘substantially similar’’ to that aired on
the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of
this section, ‘‘substantially similar’’
means that the programming must be
the same except for advertisements,
promotions for upcoming programs, and
programming features that are based on
the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0.
These enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geotargeted weather, targeted emergency
alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or
improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ‘‘wake up’’
ability and interactive program
features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible
by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g., 4K or
HDR); and
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(iv) Personalization of programming
performed by the viewer and at the
viewer’s discretion.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of
this section, programming that airs at a
different time on the ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal than on the primary
video programming stream of the ATSC
3.0 signal is not considered
‘‘substantially similar.’’
(c) Transitioning directly to ATSC 3.0.
LPTV and TV translator stations may
transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to
ATSC 3.0 operation without
simulcasting.
(d) Coverage requirements for the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel. For LPTV
and TV translator stations that elect
voluntarily to simulcast and temporarily
to relocate their ATSC 1.0 signal to the
facilities of a host station for purposes
of deploying ATSC 3.0 service (and that
convert their existing facilities to ATSC
3.0), the station:
(1) Must maintain overlap between
the protected contour of its existing
facilities and its ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signal;
(2) May not relocate its ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal more than 30 miles
from the reference coordinates of the
relocating station’s existing antenna
location; and
(3) Must select a host station assigned
to the same Designated Market Area as
the originating station (i.e., the station
whose programming is being
transmitted on the host station).
(e) Coverage requirements for ATSC
3.0 signals. For LPTV and TV translator
stations that elect voluntarily to
simulcast and to continue broadcasting
in ATSC 1.0 from the station’s existing
facilities and transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal from a host location, the ATSC
3.0 signal must be established on a host
station assigned to the same DMA as the
originating station.
(f) Simulcasting agreements. (1)
Simulcasting agreements must contain
provisions outlining each licensee’s
rights and responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including
whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station’s
transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within
the host station’s channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair,
and modification of facilities, including
a list of all relevant equipment, a
description of each party’s financial
obligations, and any relevant notice
provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the
simulcast agreement may be terminated,
assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest’s station’s (i.e., a
station originating programming that is
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
being transmitted using the facilities of
a host station) signal may be
transitioned off the host station.
(2) LPTV and TV translators must
maintain a written copy of any
simulcasting agreement and provide it
to the Commission upon request.
(g) Licensing of simulcasting stations
and stations converting to ATSC 3.0
operation. (1) Each station participating
in a simulcasting arrangement pursuant
to this section shall continue to be
licensed and operated separately, have
its own call sign, and be separately
subject to all applicable Commission
obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC
1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the
facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels
of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the
originating station’s license identifying
any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being
aired on the facilities of a host station.
The Commission will also include a
note on a host station’s license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
guest signal(s) being aired on the
facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. An LPTV or
TV translator broadcaster must file an
application (FCC Form 2100) with the
Commission, and receive Commission
approval, before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the
facilities of a host station, moving that
signal from the facilities of an existing
host station to the facilities of a different
host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an
ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station (that has already converted
to ATSC 3.0 operation), moving its
ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a
different host station, or discontinuing
an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to
transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal or
converting the station from ATSC 3.0
back to ATSC 1.0 transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect
to an application in paragraph (g)(2) of
this section, an LPTV or TV translator
broadcaster may file only an application
for modification of license provided no
other changes are being requested in
such application that would require the
filing of an application for a
construction permit as otherwise
required by the rules (see, e.g., §§ 74.751
and 74.787).
(4) Host station. A host station must
first make any necessary changes to its
facilities before a guest station may file
an application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal
on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An
application filed in accordance with the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
streamlined process in paragraph (g)(3)
of this section will receive expedited
processing provided, for LPTV and TV
translator stations seeking voluntarily to
simulcast and to air an ATSC 1.0 signal
on the facilities of a host station, the
station will provide ATSC 1.0 service to
at least 95 percent of the predicted
population within the protected contour
of its original ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An
application in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section must include the following
information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if
applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host
station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating
broadcaster’s facility and the DMA of
the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed
necessary by the Commission to process
the application.
(ii) If an application in paragraph
(g)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station, the LPTV or
TV translator broadcaster must also
indicate on the application:
(A) The predicted population within
the protected contour served by the
station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal;
(B) The predicted population within
the protected contour served by the
station’s original ATSC 1.0 signal that
will lose the station’s ATSC 1.0 service
as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas
of service loss by providing a contour
overlap map; and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signal aired on the host station will
serve at least 95 percent of the
population in paragraph (g)(6)(ii)(A) of
this section.
(iii) If an application in paragraph
(g)(2) of this section includes a request
to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station and does not
meet the 95 percent standard in
paragraph (g)(6)(ii) of this section, the
application must contain, in addition to
the information in paragraphs (g)(6)(i)
and (ii) of this section, the following
information:
(A) Whether there is another possible
host station(s) in the market that would
result in less service loss to existing
viewers and, if so, why the Next Gen TV
broadcaster chose to partner with a host
station creating a larger service loss;
(B) What steps, if any, the station
plans to take to minimize the impact of
the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC
3.0 dongles, set-top boxes, or gateway
devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(C) The public interest benefits of the
simulcasting arrangement and a
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5027
showing of why the benefit(s) of
granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s). These
applications will be considered on a
case-by-case basis.
(h) Consumer education for Next Gen
TV stations. (1) LPTV and TV translator
stations that elect voluntarily to
simulcast and that relocate their ATSC
1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a host
station’s facilities, subsequently moving
to a different host, or returning to its
original facility) will be required to air
daily Public Service Announcements
(PSAs) or crawls every day for 30 days
prior to the date that the stations will
terminate ATSC 1.0 operations on their
existing facilities. LPTV and TV
translator stations that transition
directly to ATSC 3.0 will be required to
air daily Public Service Announcements
(PSAs) or crawls every day for 30 days
prior to the date that the stations will
terminate ATSC 1.0 operations.
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided
in the same language as a majority of the
programming carried by the
transitioning station and be closedcaptioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be
provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by
the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals or transitioning directly to ATSC
3.0, each PSA or crawl must provide all
pertinent information to consumers.
(i) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV
stations relocating their ATSC 1.0
simulcast signals (e.g., moving to a
temporary host station’s facilities,
subsequently moving to a different host,
or returning to its original facility) must
provide notice to MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry
the station’s ATSC 1.0 signal due to the
relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be
obligated to carry the station’s ATSC 1.0
signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section
must contain the following information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0
channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied
by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna
position, location, or power levels;
(iv) Stream identification information;
and
(v) Engineering staff contact
information.
(3) If any of the information in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section changes,
an amended notification must be sent.
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
5028
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must
provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of
relocating their ATSC 1.0 simulcast
signals if the relocation occurs during
the post-incentive auction transition
period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of
relocating their 1.0 simulcast signals if
the relocation occurs after the postincentive auction transition period.
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC
1.0 service relocation changes, the
station must send a further notice to
affected MVPDs informing them of the
new anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose
whether to provide notice as required by
this section either by a letter notification
or electronically via email if the relevant
MVPD agrees to receive such notices by
email. Letter notifications to MVPDs
must be sent by certified mail, return
receipt requested to the MVPD’s address
in the FCC’s Online Public Inspection
File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have
an online file, notices must be sent to
the cable system’s official address of
record provided in the system’s most
recent filing in the FCC’s Cable
Operations and Licensing System
(COALS). For MVPDs with no official
address in OPIF or COALS, the letter
must be sent to the MVPD’s official
corporate address registered with their
State of incorporation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:03 Feb 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
PART 76—MULTICHANNEL VIDEO
AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE
13. The authority citation for part 76
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154,
301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312,
315, 317, 325, 338, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521,
522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544,
544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560,
561, 571, 572, 573.
14. Amend § 76.56 by adding
paragraph (h) to read as follows:
■
§ 76.56
Signal carriage obligations.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Next Gen TV carriage rights. (1) A
broadcast television station that chooses
to deploy Next Gen TV service, see
§ 73.682(f) of this chapter, may assert
mandatory carriage rights under this
section only with respect to its ATSC
1.0 signal and may not assert mandatory
carriage rights with respect to its ATSC
3.0 signal.
(2) With respect to a Next Gen TV
station that moves its 1.0 simulcast
signal to a host station’s (i.e., a station
whose facilities are being used to
transmit programming originated by
another station) facilities, the station
may assert mandatory carriage rights
under this section only if it:
(i) Qualified for, and has been
exercising, mandatory carriage rights at
its original location; and
(ii) Continues to qualify for
mandatory carriage at the host station’s
facilities, including (but not limited to)
delivering a good quality 1.0 signal to
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
the cable system principal headend, or
agreeing to be responsible for the costs
of delivering such 1.0 signal to the cable
system.
■ 15. Amend § 76.66 by adding
paragraph (o) to read as follows:
§ 76.66
Satellite broadcast signal carriage.
*
*
*
*
*
(o) Next Gen TV carriage rights. (1) A
broadcast television station that chooses
to deploy Next Gen TV service, see
§ 73.682(f) of this chapter, may assert
mandatory carriage rights under this
section only with respect to its ATSC
1.0 signal and may not assert mandatory
carriage rights with respect to its ATSC
3.0 signal.
(2) With respect to a Next Gen TV
station that moves its 1.0 simulcast
signal to a host station’s (i.e., a station
whose facilities are being used to
transmit programming originated by
another station) facilities, the station
may assert mandatory carriage rights
under this section only if it:
(i) Qualified for, and has been
exercising, mandatory carriage rights at
its original location; and
(ii) Continues to qualify for
mandatory carriage at the host station’s
facilities, including (but not limited to)
delivering a good quality 1.0 signal to
the satellite carrier local receive facility,
or agreeing to be responsible for the
costs of delivering such 1.0 signal to the
satellite carrier.
[FR Doc. 2018–01473 Filed 2–1–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\02FER2.SGM
02FER2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 23 (Friday, February 2, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4998-5028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01473]
[[Page 4997]]
Vol. 83
Friday,
No. 23
February 2, 2018
Part III
Federal Communications Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
47 CFR Parts 15, 73, 74, et al.
Authorizing Permissive Use of the ``Next Generation'' Broadcast
Television Standard; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 83 , No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2018 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 4998]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 15, 73, 74, and 76
[GN Docket No. 16-142; FCC 17-158]
Authorizing Permissive Use of the ``Next Generation'' Broadcast
Television Standard
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC
or Commission) authorizes television broadcasters to use the ``Next
Generation'' broadcast television (Next Gen TV) transmission standard,
also called ``ATSC 3.0'' or ``3.0,'' on a voluntary, market-driven
basis. This authorization is subject to broadcasters continuing to
deliver current-generation digital television (DTV) service, using the
ATSC 1.0 transmission standard, also called ``ATSC 1.0'' or ``1.0,'' to
their viewers.
DATES: Effective March 5, 2018, except for Sec. Sec. 73.3801, 73.6029,
and 74.782 which contain information collection requirements that are
not effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register
announcing the effective date for these sections. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register, as of March 5, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information, contact
Evan Baranoff, [email protected], of the Media Bureau, Policy
Division, (202) 418-7142, or Matthew Hussey, [email protected], of
the Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-3619. Direct press
inquiries to Janice Wise at (202) 418-8165. For additional information
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection
requirements contained in this document, send an email to [email protected]
or contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order (R&O), FCC 17-158, adopted on November 16, 2017 and released
on November 20, 2017. The full text of this document is available
electronically via the FCC's Electronic Document Management System
(EDOCS) website at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ or via the
FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) website at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. (Documents will be available electronically
in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) This document is also
available for public inspection and copying during regular business
hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, which is located in Room
CY-A257 at FCC Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.
The Reference Information Center is open to the public Monday through
Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30
a.m. 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 [email protected] or calling the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432
(TTY). This document incorporates by reference two ATSC 3.0 standards
of the Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC): (1) ATSC A/
321:2016 ``System Discovery & Signaling'' (A/321) and (2) A/322:2017
``Physical Layer Protocol'' (A/322). These standards are available from
ATSC, 1776 K Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20006; or at the ATSC
website: www.atsc.org/standards/atsc-3-0-standards/.
Synopsis
I. Authorizing Voluntary Deployment of ATSC 3.0
1. In this Report and Order (R&O), we authorize television
broadcasters to use the ``Next Generation'' broadcast television (Next
Gen TV) transmission standard, also called ``ATSC 3.0'' or ``3.0,'' on
a voluntary, market-driven basis. This authorization is subject to
broadcasters continuing to deliver current-generation digital
television (DTV) service, using the ATSC 1.0 transmission standard,
also called ``ATSC 1.0'' or ``1.0,'' to their viewers. ATSC 3.0 is the
new TV transmission standard developed by Advanced Television Systems
Committee as the world's first internet Protocol (IP)-based broadcast
transmission platform. It merges the capabilities of over-the-air (OTA)
broadcasting with the broadband viewing and information delivery
methods of the internet, using the same 6 MHz channels presently
allocated for DTV service. This new TV transmission standard promises
to allow broadcasters to innovate, improve service, and use their
spectrum more efficiently. It also has the potential to enable
broadcasters to provide consumers with a more immersive and enjoyable
television viewing experience on both home and mobile screens. In
addition, ATSC 3.0 will allow broadcasters to offer enhanced public
safety capabilities, such as geo-targeting of emergency alerts to
tailor information to particular communities and emergency alerting
capable of waking up sleeping devices to warn consumers of imminent
emergencies, and advanced accessibility options. With today's action,
we aim to facilitate private sector innovation and promote American
leadership in the global broadcast industry.
A. Authorization of Voluntary Use of ATSC 3.0 Transmissions and
Treatment Under the Act
2. The Commission in this R&O adopts the proposal in the Next Gen
TV Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Next Gen TV NPRM), 82 FR 13285 (March
10, 2017), to authorize ATSC 3.0 as an optional broadcast television
transmission standard. All parties who commented on the issue support
our proposal to authorize ATSC 3.0 on a voluntary, market-driven basis.
Broadcasters will be permitted, but not required, to transmit ATSC 3.0
signals if they comply with the requirements in this Order and any
other relevant rules and statutory provisions. Alternatively,
broadcasters may choose to continue transmitting their signals solely
in the currently authorized ATSC 1.0 transmission standard.
3. We conclude that stations transmitting ATSC 3.0 signals will be
engaged in ``broadcasting'' within the meaning of the Communications
Act (the ``Act''). The Act defines ``broadcasting'' as ``the
dissemination of radio communications intended to be received by the
public, directly or by the intermediary of relay stations,'' and a
``broadcast station'' as ``a radio station equipped to engage in
broadcasting.'' We proposed to interpret the Act in this manner in the
Next Gen TV NPRM, and no commenter objects to this reading of the
statute. This conclusion applies to stations transmitting both an ATSC
1.0 and an ATSC 3.0 signal pursuant to the local simulcasting
requirement we adopt in this Order and stations transmitting only an
ATSC 3.0 signal. Accordingly, all of the restrictions and obligations
that the Act imposes on television broadcasters, including obligations
or restrictions on television broadcast licenses, licensees, stations,
or services, will be applicable to broadcasters using the ATSC 3.0
transmission standard.
4. The Act includes, for example, restrictions on foreign ownership
of broadcast licenses and licensees and
[[Page 4999]]
obligations for broadcasters to provide ``reasonable access'' to
candidates for federal elective office and to afford ``equal
opportunities'' to candidates for any public office. Television
broadcasters also are subject to statutory obligations to make certain
disclosures in connection with advertisements that discuss a
``political matter of national importance'' and to disclose the
identity of program sponsors. In addition, among other requirements,
the Act specifies that television broadcasters must air educational
programming for children, limit the amount of commercial material they
include in programming directed to children, restrict the airing of
indecent programming, and comply with provisions relating to the rating
of video programming.
5. The Commission has determined that the definition of
``broadcasting'' in the Act applies to services intended to be received
by an indiscriminate public and has identified three indicia of a lack
of such intent: (1) The service is not receivable on conventional
television sets and requires a licensee or programmer-provided special
antennae and/or signal converter so the signal can be received in the
home; (2) the programming is encrypted in a way that ``makes it
unusable by the public'' and that is not ``enjoyable without the aid of
decoders''; and (3) the provider and the viewer are engaged in a
private contractual relationship.\1\ Based on the rules we adopt in
this Order to permit the voluntary use of ATSC 3.0 and the descriptions
of ATSC 3.0 transmissions in the record, we find that Next Gen TV
service will be intended to be received by all members of the public.
We are requiring Next Gen TV stations to provide one free, over-the-air
video programming stream broadcast in ATSC 3.0. Thus, the programming
on this stream will not require a private contractual agreement between
the broadcaster and the viewers. Furthermore, although TV receivers
capable of receiving ATSC 3.0 signals without the use of additional
equipment are not yet available in the United States, ATSC 3.0
transmissions will be receivable eventually on conventional television
sets. We expect that television receivers capable of receiving ATSC 3.0
signals will quickly become available as consumers realize the benefits
of Next Gen TV. Accordingly, we conclude that Next Gen TV stations will
be engaged in ``broadcasting'' as defined in the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although NAB states that ``free Next Gen signals may be
encrypted,'' it also maintains that ``viewers will not require
special equipment supplied and programmed by the broadcaster to
decode Next Gen signals.'' Programming that is encrypted must not
require special equipment supplied and programmed by the broadcaster
to decode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. ATVA notes that at some point ATSC 3.0 service may include two-
way, interactive service offerings to individual viewers (such as
targeted advertising and localized content) and asserts that at some
point these service offerings may become so individualized that they no
longer constitute ``broadcasting'' within the meaning of the Act. ATVA
suggests that the Commission ``consider where that point lies sooner
rather than later to avoid uncertainty for broadcasters, MVPDs, and
others.'' Given that the ATSC 3.0 standard is new and will be deployed
on a voluntary basis, it is not yet known precisely what interactive
services Next Gen TV broadcasters may offer or the extent to which
differentiated content may be provided to individual viewers. Moreover,
even if Next Gen TV broadcasters offer some two-way interactive
services with individualized content, not all viewers may be interested
in such individualized services, so we expect that Next Gen TV
broadcasters will continue to provide an undifferentiated broadcast
service to the general public. We therefore find that it is unnecessary
to speculate at this time as to whether certain ATSC 3.0 service
offerings may become so individualized that they would no longer meet
the definition of ``broadcasting.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We note, however, that two-way communication may be subject
to other provisions of the Communications Act and Commission rules,
including those that govern the accessibility of advanced
communications services by people with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Local Simulcasting
7. As originally proposed by Petitioners, and as we proposed in the
Next Gen TV NPRM, we require Next Gen TV broadcasters to air a local
simulcast of the primary video programming stream of their ATSC 3.0
channel in ATSC 1.0 format. We find that local simulcasting is a
critical component of the Commission's authorization of ATSC 3.0 as a
voluntary transmission standard. We discuss our local simulcasting
requirement below, including what we mean by local simulcasting and the
coverage area that must be served by the 1.0 simulcast signal. We also
address issues related to the location and coverage area of ATSC 3.0
signals, waivers and exceptions to the simulcasting requirement, and
licensing procedures for authorizing Next Gen TV broadcasters.
1. Local Simulcasting Requirement
8. Our local simulcasting requirement will be effectuated through
partnerships that broadcasters that wish to provide Next Gen TV service
must enter into with other broadcasters in their local markets.
Specifically, Next Gen TV broadcasters must partner with another
television station (i.e., a temporary ``host'' station) in their local
market to either: (1) Air an ATSC 3.0 channel at the temporary host's
facility, while using their original facility to continue to provide an
ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel, or (2) air an ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel at
the temporary host's facility, while converting their original facility
to the ATSC 3.0 standard in order to provide a 3.0 channel. In either
case, Next Gen TV broadcasters must simulcast the primary video
programming stream of their ATSC 3.0 channel in an ATSC 1.0 format, so
that viewers will continue to receive ATSC 1.0 service.
9. We apply our local simulcasting requirement only to the primary
video programming stream aired by Next Gen TV broadcasters on their
ATSC 3.0 channels.\3\ Next Gen TV stations may be able to transmit
multiple streams of programming in ATSC 3.0, as many do today in ATSC
1.0. Although we encourage those Next Gen TV broadcasters that elect to
air multiple streams of ATSC 3.0 programming to also simulcast more
than a single programming stream, we will require them to simulcast
only their primary stream in ATSC 1.0 format.\4\ Commenters generally
agree that any local simulcasting requirement should apply to a Next
Gen TV station's primary stream. We give broadcasters discretion to
select the primary stream for purposes of our local simulcasting
requirement.\5\ Because broadcasters have a strong incentive to provide
continuity of service to existing viewers, we believe they will elect
to simulcast the programming stream that viewers expect to be able to
receive, such as a stream containing network
[[Page 5000]]
programming \6\ or the stream that has the largest number of viewers
for non-network stations.\7\ We will monitor the deployment of ATSC 3.0
and the effectiveness of our local simulcasting requirement in
protecting viewers and will reconsider our approach if necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ We note that the term ``primary'' is also used in the
carriage context to refer to the stream for which a station demands
mandatory carriage. That stream generally contains network
programming for network affiliates or the station's most popular
programming for non-network stations.
\4\ We also do not require Next Gen TV broadcasters that
currently air multicast streams to continue to do so on their ATSC
1.0 simulcast channel. The provision of multicast channels is
discretionary, and we decline to adopt rules requiring broadcasters
who currently air such channels to continue to do so.
\5\ This is consistent with our decision in the context of the
transition from analog to digital television.
\6\ We note that broadcasters may also have a contractual
obligation, through their network affiliation agreements, to
continue to provide certain programming to viewers in the current
DTV standard.
\7\ Broadcasters argue they have a strong economic incentive to
continue to serve their viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. The Commission intends that the local simulcasting requirement
be temporary.\8\ The Commission will monitor the pace of the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0 both nationally and market-by-market, including
the rollout of 3.0 service by television broadcasters, the penetration
of ATSC 3.0-ready TV sets and other converter equipment, and the extent
to which MVPDs have deployed 3.0 equipment. As we proposed in the Next
Gen TV NPRM, we will determine in a later proceeding when it would be
appropriate for the Commission to eliminate the requirement that
broadcasters continue to provide an ATSC 1.0 signal.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ We anticipate that Next Gen TV broadcasters that initiate
3.0 service at another location will ultimately return to their
existing licensed facility and convert that facility from 1.0 to 3.0
technology.
\9\ The commenters who address this issue agree that this issue
should be handled in a separate proceeding. NAB agrees that stations
should continue to transmit a 1.0 signal until the Commission
determines that it is appropriate to sunset that requirement, but
argues that the requirement that the 1.0 signal be substantially
similar to the 3.0 signal should apply only for three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. We find that local simulcasting is essential to the deployment
of Next Gen TV service on a voluntary, market-driven basis for all
stakeholders, and we agree with the many commenters who support a
requirement that broadcasters implementing Next Gen TV must continue to
air at least one ATSC 1.0 programming stream.\10\ Local simulcasting is
necessary because ATSC 3.0 service is not backward-compatible with
existing TV sets or receivers, which have only ATSC 1.0 and analog
tuners. This means that consumers will not be able to view ATSC 3.0
transmissions on their existing televisions without additional
equipment. As the Petition recognized and as discussed in the Next Gen
TV NPRM, local simulcasting is a means to address this challenge.\11\
With local simulcasting, viewers will be able to continue to watch a
Next Gen TV station's programming without having to purchase new TV
sets or converter equipment to receive ATSC 3.0 service. Thus, as
Petitioners explain, ``local simulcasting will permit uninterrupted
service to continue as the American public embraces Next Generation TV
reception equipment, and will permit this innovative new standard to be
implemented without necessitating new simulcast channels from the
Commission.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Next Gen TV broadcasters may voluntarily air more than one
ATSC 1.0 programming stream, but are required to air only one ATSC
1.0 simulcast channel.
\11\ Indeed, the Petition asserted that ``the core of the
voluntary, market-driven implementation of ATSC 3.0 will be local
simulcasting.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. To avoid either forcing viewers to acquire new equipment or
depriving them of television service, it is critical that broadcasters
continue to provide service using the current ATSC 1.0 standard to
deliver DTV service while the marketplace adopts devices compatible
with the new 3.0 transmission standard. Television sets capable of
receiving ATSC 3.0 signals are currently being developed in South
Korea,\12\ but are not yet commercially available in the United States.
We recognize that 3.0 capable equipment likely will be produced for the
U.S. market once the 3.0 standard is approved and that it will be
possible for consumers to connect ATSC 3.0 converter devices to many
existing newer television sets through HDMI ports. Nevertheless,
without a local simulcasting requirement, many consumers would be
forced to purchase new sets or other equipment in order to continue
viewing over the air television.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ According to ATVA, ATSC 3.0 receivers will become
increasingly available in South Korea this year in advance of 4K
Ultra HD broadcasts of the Winter Olympic Games in Korea in February
2018. In the United States, ATSC 3.0 is on the air for testing under
FCC experimental authority in several markets including Baltimore,
Cleveland, and Raleigh.
\13\ Broadcasters themselves acknowledge the need to continue to
provide ATSC 1.0 service while the marketplace adapts over time to
ATSC 3.0 technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. A simulcast mandate applicable to a Next Gen TV station's
primary 3.0 video programming stream will also help ensure that MVPDs
can continue to provide the 1.0 signals of Next Gen TV broadcasters to
their subscribers. According to ATVA and NCTA, the equipment used by
MVPDs today to receive, transmit, and provide broadcast signals to
viewers via set-top boxes is incapable of providing an ATSC 3.0 signal
in its native format to subscribers.\14\ The continued provision of a
1.0 signal will help ensure that MVPDs can continue to carry the 1.0
signal of stations deploying 3.0 without necessitating MVPDs incur the
expense of converting to 3.0 capable equipment or acquiring the
equipment necessary to permit reception of an ATSC 3.0 signal and
``down converting'' that signal to a format compatible with legacy
equipment, including set-top boxes.\15\ In addition, the local
simulcasting requirement will assist MVPDs, especially small and rural
cable providers, that rely on OTA reception of broadcast signals to
continue retransmitting to their subscribers an uninterrupted ATSC 1.0
OTA signal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ NCTA claims that cable system costs to convert to 3.0
equipment could be ``significant.'' In addition, according to ATVA
and NCTA, even if broadcast signals could be passed through in a
native ATSC 3.0 format, because of their potentially higher
resolution such signals would consume more capacity than signals in
1.0 format. The impact on capacity would be exacerbated by the need
for systems carrying 3.0 signals to also carry and deliver those
signals in 1.0 format because MVPD subscribers will continue to have
television sets that cannot receive ATSC 3.0 signals for the
foreseeable future. ATVA notes that these capacity issues pose a
problem in particular for satellite carriers, whose spot beams may
be full or nearly full, and small cable system operators, many of
which do not have spare capacity to devote to carriage of additional
signals in higher-resolution formats.
\15\ ATVA and ACA note that MVPD equipment related to ATSC 3.0
reception is not yet commercially available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. We disagree with those commenters who advocate that the
Commission refrain from adopting a simulcast mandate on the ground that
broadcasters already have incentives to ensure continuity of service to
viewers and that they need flexibility to implement 3.0 service. While
we recognize that broadcasters have a strong economic incentive to
continue to reach their viewers absent a mandate to do so, we conclude
that codifying and clarifying this obligation is necessary to provide
certainty to consumers, broadcasters, MVPDs, and others who will be
affected by the voluntary rollout of 3.0 service. Accordingly, we
decline to make the simulcasting obligation a ``best efforts''
requirement, as advocated by ATBA, or a ``reasonable efforts''
requirement as proposed by ONE Media. We recognize, however, that some
degree of flexibility is necessary to ensure that all stations are able
to deploy 3.0 technology, including those that cannot find a
simulcasting partner. As discussed below, we will permit LPTV and TV
translator stations the option of deploying ATSC 3.0 service without
simulcasting (i.e., ``transition directly'' to ATSC 3.0) \16\ without
requesting a waiver from the Commission, in recognition of the
[[Page 5001]]
unique difficulties these stations may face in locating a simulcasting
partner and to permit these stations to serve as 3.0 ``host'' stations
for other broadcasters. In addition, we will consider requests for
waiver of the simulcast requirements on a case-by-case basis, including
requests from full power and Class A stations to transition directly
from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0. In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
published December 20, 2017 (82 FR 60350), we also sought comment on
whether we should permit Class A and NCE television stations to
transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 without seeking waivers
or adopt a presumptive waiver standard for such stations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ In the Next Gen TV NPRM, we referred to this practice as a
``flash-cut.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. We permit all television station classes to participate
together in simulcast arrangements. Thus, a full power station could
partner with one or more other full power stations or with one or more
Class A, LPTV, or TV translator stations. We also permit NCE stations
to participate in simulcast arrangements with commercial stations. Any
Next Gen TV broadcaster that airs an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal from a
partner host station necessarily must operate that signal using the
technical facilities of the host. For example, a Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator station airing a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on a full power host
station will necessarily operate its 1.0 or 3.0 ``guest'' signal using
the technical facilities of the full power station, including the
higher power limit specified in 47 CFR part 73.\17\ Conversely, a full
power station airing a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on a Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator station must operate that signal at the Class A, LPTV, or TV
translator's lower Part 74 power level.\18\ Otherwise, stations airing
a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on a partner host station will continue to be
obligated to comply with the programming and other operational
obligations of the station originating the signal (rather than those of
the partner host station). Thus, a full power Next Gen TV broadcaster
airing a 1.0 simulcast signal on a partner host simulcast station must
continue to comply with the programming and operational obligations of
a Part 73 licensee. Similarly a Class A station airing a 1.0 or 3.0
signal on a partner host station will continue to be obligated to
comply with the programming and other operational obligations of a
Class A licensee, including airing a minimum of 18 hours a day and an
average of at least three hours per week of locally produced
programming each quarter, as required by 47 CFR 73.6001.\19\ A
reserved-channel full power NCE licensee, whether it airs a channel on
a commercial partner host station or serves as a partner host to a
commercial guest channel, will retain its NCE status and must continue
to comply with the rules applicable to NCE licensees. In either case,
the NCE full power station's portion of the use of the 6 MHz channel
will be reserved for NCE-only use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Compare 47 CFR 73.622(h) with 47 CFR 74.735(b). An LPTV or
TV translator station that airs a ``guest'' channel on a partner
host full power or Class A station will obtain ``quasi'' primary
interference protection for that channel for the duration of the
simulcasting arrangement by virtue of the fact that the full power
or Class A station is a primary licensee. Although the LPTV or TV
translator will continue to be licensed with secondary interference
protection status, the primary status of the host full power or
Class A station will protect the ``guest'' channel aired on the
partner host station from interference or displacement. This
approach is consistent with our rules for channel sharing between
stations with differing technical rules (full power and Class A
television stations) in the context of the incentive auction and
outside the incentive auction context.
\18\ A full power or Class A ``guest'' station airing a channel
on a partner host LPTV or TV translator station will be subject to
displacement with respect to that channel because the host has
secondary interference protection rights.
\19\ In addition, a Class A licensee that airs a guest signal on
a full power host station will continue to be subject to the
restrictions set forth in 47 U.S.C. 336(f)(7)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Simulcast agreements must include provisions outlining each
station's rights and responsibilities in the following areas: (i)
Access to facilities, including whether each licensee will have
unrestricted access to the shared transmission facilities; (ii)
allocation of capacity within the shared channel; (iii) operation,
maintenance, repair, and modification of facilities, including a list
of all relevant equipment, a description of each party's financial
obligations, and any relevant notice provisions; (iv) the conditions
under which the simulcast agreement may be terminated, assigned or
transferred; and (v) how a guest's signal may be transitioned off the
host station. License applicants must certify that the agreement
contains such provisions. By requiring stations to address these issues
in their simulcast agreements, we seek to avoid disputes that could
lead to a disruption in service to the public and to ensure that each
licensee is able to fulfill its independent obligation to comply with
all pertinent statutory requirements and our rules.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ We do not anticipate becoming involved in the resolution of
stations' private contractual disputes regarding simulcast
arrangements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. The provisions that we require in simulcast agreements are
similar to those we have required in channel sharing agreements
(CSAs).\21\ We note that simulcast arrangements differ from CSAs in
that the former are temporary and because, unlike channel sharing, each
guest station can default back to its own licensed facility in the
event the parties face irreconcilable differences. Further, unlike in
the channel sharing context, the host station in a simulcast
arrangement retains the right to resume use of the entire 6 MHz
channel, subject to the terms of the simulcast agreement, without prior
Commission approval.\22\ We do not require that local simulcast
agreements be submitted to the Commission as part of a license
application, as these arrangements are intended to be temporary. We
also conclude that such a requirement would be unnecessarily burdensome
as Next Gen TV broadcasters may need to change to a new partner host
station, and therefore enter into a new simulcast agreement, or modify
existing agreements as the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0 becomes
more widespread. We do, however, require that broadcasters that enter
into local simulcast agreements maintain a written copy of such
agreements and provide them to the Commission upon request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ We adopted similar provisions for full power and Class A
television channel sharing arrangements entered into in conjunction
with the incentive auction and outside the auction context, and for
secondary-secondary CSAs.
\22\ In addition, the guest station's companion channel aired on
a partner host station will be considered part of the guest
station's existing license and may not be assigned to a third party
separately from the guest station's license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Definition of Local Simulcasting
a. Programming on the 1.0 and 3.0 Channels
18. We require that, for the time being, the programming aired on
the ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel be ``substantially similar'' to that of
the primary video programming stream on the ATSC 3.0 channel. We define
this requirement to mean that the programming on the 1.0 simulcast
channel and the 3.0 primary stream must be the same, except for
programming features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of
ATSC 3.0, advertisements, and promotions for upcoming programs.\23\
This approach
[[Page 5002]]
will help ensure that viewers do not lose access to the broadcast
programming they receive today, while still providing flexibility for
broadcasters to innovate and experiment with new, innovative
programming features using Next Gen TV technology. The substantially
similar requirement will sunset in five years from its effective date
(i.e., the date it is published in the Federal Register) absent further
action by the Commission via rulemaking to extend it.\24\ While we
conclude that this requirement is necessary in the early stages of ATSC
3.0 deployment, it could unnecessarily impede Next Gen TV programming
innovations as the deployment of ATSC 3.0 progresses. We intend to
monitor the ATSC 3.0 marketplace, and will extend the substantially
similar requirement if necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ We also provide an exception for instances where
broadcasters are able to obtain the rights to air the 1.0 version of
a program but not the 3.0 version of that program. In such cases,
broadcasters may air that program on their 1.0 simulcast stream and
a different program on their 3.0 primary stream. This exception does
not appear to significantly implicate the concern expressed by some
that broadcasters would choose to obtain the rights to air the 3.0
version of a program and not the 1.0 version of that program so that
the most desired programming could be made available solely on the
3.0 channel. We caution, however, that if this exception somehow is
abused to lead to that outcome, the Commission will revisit it.
\24\ Some commenters oppose an automatic sunset of the
substantially similar requirement absent Commission action, but
support Commission review of this requirement in a future
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Enhanced Capabilities. We do not apply the requirement to
certain enhanced capabilities that cannot reasonably be provided in
ATSC 1.0 format.\25\ These capabilities include ``hyper-localized''
content (e.g., geo-targeted weather, targeted emergency alerts, and
hyper-local news),\26\ programming features or improvements created for
the 3.0 service (e.g., emergency alert ``wake up'' ability and
interactive programming features), enhanced formats made possible by
3.0 technology (e.g., 4K or HDR), and any personalization of
programming performed by the viewer and at the viewer's discretion.\27\
Further, because ATSC 3.0 technology may enable broadcasters to provide
more tailored advertisements or promotions to individual viewers than
ATSC 1.0 technology, we also do not apply the requirement to
advertisements or promotions for upcoming programming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ While some of these capabilities may be theoretically
possible within the ATSC 1.0 framework, they are not currently part
of the ATSC 1.0 standards, are unlikely to be included in current
consumer equipment, and as such cannot reasonably be provided via
ATSC 1.0.
\26\ ATSC 3.0 technology permits stations to simultaneously
transmit different content to viewers. Thus, a station could
simultaneously transmit a Washington, DC-focused news program to
viewers in Washington, DC, a Virginia-focused news program to
viewers in Virginia, and a Maryland-focused news program to viewers
in Maryland. Viewers may also be able to select which of the three
programs to view. In terms of its ATSC 1.0 simulcast, the station
will determine what programming to air on its ATSC 1.0 programming
stream in these circumstances (i.e., one of the three programs or a
broader newscast that includes elements of all three).
\27\ We agree with NAB and ATVA that the local simulcasting
requirement should not apply to ``content transmitted by means other
than a real-time ATSC 3.0 broadcast transmission'' (e.g., a link to
programming available over the internet).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Time Shifting. We do not consider programming that airs at a
different time on the 1.0 simulcast channel than on the 3.0 primary
channel to be substantially similar. Our goal in this regard is to
ensure that popular programming continues to be aired on the 1.0
channel at the time viewers generally expect it to be aired.
21. The goal of our local simulcasting requirement is to preserve a
station's existing service to viewers. To ensure that viewers are
protected, it is important not only to require that television
broadcasters continue to broadcast in the current ATSC 1.0 standard
while ATSC 3.0 is being deployed, but also that they continue to air in
ATSC 1.0 format the programming that viewers most want and expect to
receive. We seek to ensure that broadcasters air their most popular,
widely-viewed programming on their 1.0 simulcast channels so that
viewers are not forced to purchase 3.0 capable equipment simply to
continue to receive this programming rather than because they find the
ATSC 3.0 technology particularly attractive.
22. We find that our approach provides both flexibility and clear
guidance to broadcasters regarding their simulcasting obligation. We
also note that it is consistent with the expectation expressed by
broadcasters that Next Gen TV signals will contain programming that is
``substantially the same'' as the programming carried on the ATSC 1.0
signal, taking into account the ability to enhance the 3.0 programming
using the capabilities made possible by the new television
standard.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ ONE Media Comments at 9 (``During the simulcast period, we
expect that Next Gen signals will include programming that is either
substantially the same, or that is comparable to the programming
carried on the ATSC 1.0 signal, taking into account the ability to
enhance that programming using the 3.0 capabilities.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. We decline to adopt requirements regarding the format of the
1.0 simulcast signal.\29\ We recognize that broadcasters may face
spectrum constraints that could limit their ability to continue to
provide HD programming or other enhanced formats on their 1.0 simulcast
signals. Because simulcasting partnerships will require that more
stations share the same amount of spectrum, stations may have less
capacity for HD programming. Our existing rules do not require
broadcasters to provide their signals in HD,\30\ and we decline to
adopt such rules for purposes of the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0
service.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Similarly, we decline to limit ATSC 1.0 host stations to
transmitting only two HD video streams to avoid affecting the signal
quality of the streams.
\30\ DTV broadcasters are required only to transmit in SD.
\31\ We also decline to require stations to disclose any planned
change in signal quality as part of their simulcasting application
or to permit the Commission to review and approve such changes, as
advocated by Consumer Advocates. Our rules do not require HD service
and we decline to consider the provision of such service as part of
our review of simulcasting applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. We recognize that if broadcasters that currently transmit in HD
switch to standard definition (SD) in order to deploy ATSC 3.0 service,
consumers may not receive HD signals.\32\ This change could affect both
OTA viewers and MVPD subscribers, as MVPDs often rely on OTA reception
of broadcast signals to retransmit local programming to their
subscribers.\33\ Nevertheless, we expect that broadcasters will seek to
provide the highest quality signals possible while they voluntarily
deploy 3.0, as they do today.\34\ That is, while we urge broadcasters
to continue to provide high quality/HD service on their 1.0 simulcast
channels to the extent possible, we will rely on broadcasters' market-
based incentives to do so rather than mandating a specific format for
simulcast channels.\35\ For the same
[[Page 5003]]
reasons, we also decline to require broadcasters that choose to convert
their ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal from HD to SD, or otherwise change the
quality of the signal, to deliver a higher resolution signal to
MVPDs.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ A number of commenters express concern that a broadcaster
serving as a host for the ATSC 1.0 simulcasts of other stations will
degrade the HD quality of these streams as compared to their current
HD programming, or no longer provide HD service at all on the 1.0
simulcasts, in order to minimize the bandwidth the host station must
devote to simulcast signals and thereby maximize available space for
other broadcast streams. Some commenters also express concern that
broadcasters may deliberately degrade ATSC 1.0 signal quality in
order to ``encourage'' ATSC 3.0 adoption.
\33\ According to ATVA, many of its members rely on OTA delivery
of broadcast signals for more than half of the stations they
retransmit and all of its members rely on OTA delivery as a backup
to their other method of receiving the signals they retransmit.
Small rural MVPDs are more likely to rely exclusively on OTA
delivery of TV signals. While MVPDs that rely on OTA delivery could
mitigate signal quality issues by obtaining delivery through
alternate means, such as fiber, DBS transport, or reception and
transcoding/down conversion of the ATSC 3.0 signal, such methods may
require significant expenditures that small MVPDs in particular are
less able to afford. In addition, even if an ATSC 3.0 signal could
be received OTA at the MVPD headend, the equipment necessary to
receive that signal off-air and to transcode/down convert it is not
yet commercially available.
\34\ Most broadcasters who address this issue argue that
mandating a specific format for the 1.0 or 3.0 streams during the
voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0 would hamper the deployment of 3.0
service.
\35\ Pearl states that ``its members intend to keep their
primary ATSC 1.0 signal in high definition during the transition''
because ``consumers expect this programming to be in high
definition'' and ``network affiliation agreements as well as other
programming agreements generally require network programming to be
transmitted in HD.
\36\ ATVA argues that the Commission should not rely on
marketplace incentives because broadcasters might have competing
economic incentives to take steps to try to drive consumers to buy
new equipment for ATSC 3.0, including by degrading ATSC 1.0 signals.
In light of broadcasters' representations that they will not take
such action, and in the absence of any reliable record evidence to
suggest that broadcasters are likely to behave in this manner, we
decline to adopt additional restrictions, as requested by ATVA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Coverage Requirements for the ATSC 1.0 Simulcast Signal
25. We next address the required coverage area for Next Gen TV
stations that relocate their 1.0 simulcast signal to a temporary host
station (and convert their existing facilities to ATSC 3.0). In
particular, we address the extent to which the coverage area of the new
1.0 simulcast signal must overlap with the station's existing ATSC 1.0
coverage area. For full power broadcasters implementing Next Gen TV
service in this manner, we require that the station's 1.0 simulcast
channel retain and continue to cover the station's community of license
and that it be assigned to the same DMA as the originating station.\37\
In addition, in evaluating applications filed by stations seeking to
air their ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal on a partner host station, we will
consider any loss in signal coverage resulting from the simulcast
arrangement in determining whether to grant the application. We will
consider more favorably simulcast arrangements with a service loss of
no more than five percent of the population served by the station and
will provide expedited processing of such applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ We will consider stations that are not assigned to a DMA by
Nielsen to be assigned to the DMA in which they are located.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. This coverage requirement is consistent with our goal to
minimize disruption to viewers as a result of the voluntary deployment
of ATSC 3.0. If a station moves its ATSC 1.0 signal to a simulcast host
station with a different transmitter location, existing OTA viewers may
no longer be able to receive the signal. In addition, MVPDs that lose
OTA reception of the signal at their local headend may no longer be
able to carry the station. By requiring stations to continue to provide
an ATSC 1.0 signal that covers their current community of license and
encouraging them to keep coverage loss to five percent or less of the
population currently receiving a 1.0 signal over the air, we will limit
the number of current viewers and MVPD headends that will lose access
to the OTA 1.0 signal as a result of local simulcasting. Although we
agree that broadcasters have a market incentive to continue to reach
their viewers during the implementation of ATSC 3.0 service, we do not
believe it is appropriate to rely solely on market incentives when it
comes to the selection of 1.0 simulcast partners given the potential
impact of service loss on OTA viewers as well as MVPDs. We also decline
to permit Next Gen TV stations to arrange for the simulcast of their
ATSC 1.0 signal on another broadcast facility ``serving a substantially
similar community of license,'' as proposed by Petitioners, as that
standard would appear to permit a station to temporarily cease
providing 1.0 service to its own community of license and could result
in a significant reduction or change in the station's coverage area.
27. Signal Relocation. Full power broadcasters implementing 3.0
service must continue to provide 1.0 service to the station's existing
community of license and comply with our community of license signal
requirement. A full power Next Gen TV station that seeks to move its
1.0 signal to a temporary simulcast host must choose a simulcast
partner from whose transmitter site the Next Gen TV broadcaster will
continue to meet the community of license signal requirement over its
current community of license.\38\ This approach ensures that full power
Next Gen TV broadcasters continue to provide 1.0 service to the local
community they were licensed to serve, consistent with the goals
underlying Section 307(b) of the Communications Act to ensure the
provision of service to local communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Under the Commission's rules, a full power television
station must locate its transmitter at a site from which it can
place a principal community contour over its entire community of
license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. Class A, LPTV, and TV translator stations do not have a
community of license signal requirement. For Class A stations that
propose to broadcast their ATSC 1.0 signal from a temporary host
facility, we will apply the existing 30-mile and contour overlap
restrictions that apply to low power station moves. Thus, a Class A
station that proposes to move its 1.0 signal in order to implement 3.0
service: (1) Must maintain overlap between the protected contour of its
existing and proposed 1.0 signal; and (2) may not relocate its 1.0
simulcast signal more than 30 miles from the reference coordinates of
the relocating station's antenna location.
29. As discussed below, we exempt LPTV and TV translator stations
from our local simulcasting requirement and permit them to transition
directly from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 service. If an LPTV or TV translator
station elects voluntarily to simulcast, however, and to move its 1.0
signal to a temporary simulcast host in order to implement 3.0 service
on its existing facilities, we require that the station comply with the
restrictions we adopt above with respect to such moves by a Class A
station.\39\ This approach is consistent with the goal of our local
simulcasting requirement to protect existing viewers. We also note that
LPTV and TV translator stations that elect to simulcast will benefit
from the licensed simulcast approach we adopt herein that will, for
example, permit them to partner with an NCE host station.\40\ Thus, we
conclude that these stations should meet the same coverage requirements
with respect to their ATSC 1.0 signal as other low power stations if
they elect to simulcast and to move their 1.0 signal as part of a local
simulcasting arrangement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ We also require that an LPTV or TV translator station that
elects to simulcast comply with the other simulcasting requirements
we adopt herein, including the substantially similar programming
requirement.
\40\ We note that an LPTV or TV translator station could
alternatively choose to enter into a multicasting arrangement with a
commercial host station rather than seeking a license to simulcast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Expedited Processing. We provide expedited processing to full
power, Class A, LPTV, and TV translator applications if the 1.0
simulcast signal broadcast at the temporary host facility will serve at
least 95 percent of the predicted population served by the originating
station's 1.0 signal. The Commission has used a 95 percent population
coverage threshold for purposes of expedited processing of applications
both in the context of the DTV transition and the incentive auction
repacking process, and we conclude that it is appropriate to adopt the
same standard here.\41\ We anticipate
[[Page 5004]]
that the Media Bureau generally will be able to process applications
qualifying for expedited processing within 15 business days after
public notice of the filing of such applications. Applications that do
not qualify for expedited processing will be considered on a case-by-
case basis. We expect generally to process applications that do not
qualify for expedited processing within 60 business days after we give
notice of the filing of the application in the Daily Digest. In
addition to information regarding any population that will lose 1.0
service as a result of the simulcast arrangement, such applications
must contain the following information: (1) Whether there is another
possible simulcast partner(s) in the market that would result in less
1.0 service loss to existing viewers and, if so, why the Next Gen TV
broadcaster chose to partner with a station creating a larger service
loss; (2) what steps, if any, the station plans to take to minimize the
impact of the 1.0 service loss (e.g., providing ATSC 3.0 dongles, set-
top boxes, or gateway devices to viewers in the loss area); and (3) the
public interest benefits of the simulcast arrangement and a showing of
why the station believes the benefit(s) of granting the application
outweigh the harm(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ The Commission used a 95% population coverage threshold in
the context of the DTV transition for purposes of providing
expedited processing to applications for construction of facilities
on broadcasters' final, post-DTV transition channels. In addition,
in the post-incentive auction repack the Commission provided
expedited processing to applications for authorization for repacked
facilities that, inter alia, are no more than five percent smaller
than those specified in the Channel Reassignment PN with respect to
predicted population served. Just because an application qualifies
for expedited processing does not necessarily mean that the
application will be granted. Applications that receive expedited
review but that are not readily grantable by the Commission may
require further action by the station. We disagree with NAB that
expedited processing should apply if a 1.0 simulcast signal aired on
a host station covers the originating station's community of
license, without reference to loss of predicted population served by
the 1.0 signal. NAB claims that such an approach ``mirrors the
coverage area standard the Commission used during the DTV
transition.'' We agree with NCTA that NAB's analogy to the DTV
transition is inapt. While the Commission permitted stations to
construct initial DTV facilities that served only their community of
license, that decision was temporary and was accompanied by a ``use-
or-lose'' deadline for their final DTV facilities by which
broadcasters were required either to replicate their analog coverage
or lose DTV service protection to any unreplicated areas. Moreover,
because viewers continued to receive analog service until the end of
the DTV transition, the initial DTV build-out requirement to which
NAB refers was not essential to preserve existing service to
viewers. To ensure that existing viewers will continue to receive
1.0 service, the Commission is using the same processing standard
for 1.0 simulcast signals that it used for final DTV facilities, not
the standard used in the initial DTV build-out.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. Our approach appropriately balances the need to ensure
continued provision of service to viewers while broadcasters
voluntarily deploy ATSC 3.0 and permitting broadcasters sufficient
flexibility to locate and select a simulcast partner. We believe that
the vast majority of broadcasters in today's market should be able to
find a simulcast partner that would enable them to qualify for
expedited processing under this approach.\42\ In markets where it may
not be possible for a station seeking to implement ATSC 3.0 service to
find a 1.0 simulcast partner that would meet the test for expedited
processing, the Next Gen TV broadcaster could seek regular (versus
expedited) Commission approval of its simulcasting arrangement with the
required additional showings, or seek a waiver of the simulcasting
requirement. Broadcasters also have the option to continue to provide
1.0 service on their existing facility while implementing 3.0 service
on another station.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Commission staff estimates that about 95% of full power
stations are in a market where there is at least one other station
in the market that could serve as a simulcast host station that
would meet our community of license coverage requirement, and that
75% of such stations are in markets where they would have at least
four other stations that could serve as a potential simulcast host
station under this requirement. In addition, approximately 80% of
full power and Class A stations are in markets where there is at
least one other station that could serve as a simulcast host that
would qualify under our expedited processing standard. We also note
that ONE Media ``expect[s] the instances in which simulcasting is
not feasible to be the rare exception.'' ONE Media attached a list
of television markets that will have either one, two, or three
stations (after accounting for stations cleared in the incentive
auction).
For purposes of the community of license analysis, the staff did
a pairwise study of the contours for all full-power and Class A
stations, based on data from TVStudy, to count, for each station,
the number of other stations' contours that contained a potential
guest's community of license. For the expedited processing analysis,
the staff looked at the service of all full-power and Class A
stations, based on data from TVStudy, and did a pairwise study to
count, for each station, the population of cells that are served by
both the potential host station and the potential guest and compared
that to the total population served by the potential guest.
\43\ LPTV and TV translator stations also have the option to
transition directly to ATSC 3.0 without simulcasting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. For stations electing to move their 1.0 simulcast channel to a
temporary host station, we decline to limit service loss to only 0.5
percent of the station's predicted population served, absent a waiver,
as advocated by some commenters. In the context of the incentive
auction, the Commission determined that no individual station
reassignment made by the Commission pursuant to the repacking process
would be permitted to reduce another station's population by more than
0.5 percent. This standard was chosen to implement a statutory
requirement to ``make all reasonable efforts'' to preserve a station's
population served during the repacking process. We find that a somewhat
less strict standard, that restricts population loss to five percent
absent a showing that a greater loss is warranted, is appropriate to
permit broadcasters sufficient flexibility to locate a simulcast
partner while also protecting viewers from undue service
disruption.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ We decline to adopt a rebuttable presumption that
broadcasters that do not meet the 95% standard will have their
simulcast applications denied by the Commission, as advocated by
Consumer Advocates. We believe that this proposal would unduly
restrict broadcasters' flexibility to find simulcast partners. As
noted above, applicants that do not satisfy the 95% standard will be
required to make a more detailed showing regarding their proposed
simulcasting partnership than those that do meet the standard, and
we conclude that this showing will enable Commission staff to
adequately analyze these applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. We also decline to require a station to demonstrate that it has
made ``reasonable efforts'' to continue to air its ATSC 1.0 signal from
its existing facility before permitting the station to simulcast that
signal from a temporary host facility. Next Gen TV broadcasters have a
market-based incentive to continue to serve their existing viewers, and
the requirements we adopt herein provide additional incentives and
protections to ensure continuity of service when possible. Our approach
appropriately balances our goal of protecting existing viewers with the
need to provide Next Gen TV broadcasters with flexibility to manage
their deployment of ATSC 3.0 based on their station's and market's
unique circumstances.
34. In addition, we decline to require that stations that transmit
their ATSC simulcast 1.0 signal from a new host facility reach the
headends of all MVPDs that rely on OTA delivery or to reimburse MVPDs
for the costs associated with reception and processing of an ATSC 1.0
signal delivered from a new location.\45\ We note that our ATSC 1.0
simulcast coverage requirement will help MVPDs that rely on OTA
reception of TV signals, including many rural small MVPDs,\46\ by
encouraging stations to maintain ATSC 1.0 signal coverage to most of
their existing service contour, thus helping to ensure that these
signals continue to reach an MVPD's headend or local receive facility.
The Communications Act requires must-carry stations to assume
responsibility
[[Page 5005]]
for delivery of a good-quality signal to MVPDs and, for retransmission
consent stations, leaves allocation of responsibility to the parties.
As discussed below, we decline to adopt rules at this time that alter
the allocation of financial responsibility during retransmission
consent negotiations for purposes of the voluntary deployment of ATSC
3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ These costs include the cost to deliver a signal by
alternate means, such as fiber, as well as the cost of new receivers
and antennas. If a Next Gen TV broadcaster changes to a new 1.0
simulcast host station, MVPDs could incur some of these costs more
than once.
\46\ According to ACA, small MVPDs, which are more likely to
rely exclusively on OTA delivery of TV signals, are often located in
rural areas on the edges of an existing service contour and are thus
more likely to lose service. ACA Comments at 8. In addition, these
MVPDs are less able to mitigate costs through fiber delivery than
their small urban counterparts as they are less likely to be located
in areas with existing fiber providers and thus more likely to
require deployment of a more-expensive dedicated fiber strand or
entire cable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Coverage Requirements for ATSC 3.0 Simulcast Signal
35. We provide more location and coverage flexibility to Next Gen
TV broadcasters that elect to continue broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 from
their existing transmitter location \47\ and transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal from a temporary host location.\48\ We will permit such
broadcasters to establish 3.0 service anywhere within the same DMA as
the broadcaster's existing station. We also will not consider the
extent to which the population served by such stations overlaps with
the population served by the existing ATSC 1.0 station.\49\ By
providing more latitude for the location of the 3.0 signal, we hope to
encourage Next Gen TV broadcasters to initiate 3.0 service on another
facility initially while maintaining their 1.0 signal at the station's
existing location, when possible, thereby avoiding disruption to
viewers and MVPDs. We accord this flexibility in order to facilitate
the implementation of ATSC 3.0 and because we are less concerned about
the provision of Next Gen TV 3.0 service to a station's existing
viewers, particularly early in the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0,
than we are with preserving ATSC 1.0 service to those viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ By existing transmitter location, we mean a station's
licensed transmitter site immediately prior to either implementation
of ATSC 3.0 service or initiation of an ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal on
a partner simulcast host station.
\48\ A Next Gen TV broadcaster that converts to ATSC 3.0
operation on their existing facility must provide 3.0 service to
their existing service area.
\49\ We do not establish a separate community of license or
coverage requirement for 3.0 ``guest'' signals because these
broadcasters will continue to provide ATSC 1.0 service to their
existing community of license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Simulcast Exceptions for LPTV and TV Translator Stations
36. We exempt LPTV and TV translator stations from our local
simulcasting requirement and allow these stations to elect to
transition directly to 3.0 service. LPTV and TV translator stations
electing to transition directly must first file an application to
convert their facilities to 3.0 operation. In addition, they must
comply with the MVPD notification and consumer education requirements
adopted herein.
37. We adopt this simulcast exception for LPTV and TV translator
stations in recognition of the fact that they face unique challenges in
locating a simulcast partner. As a practical matter, many are not
located near another LPTV or TV translator station and they may not be
attractive simulcast partners for full power stations because of their
lower power and coverage area. In addition, because LPTV and TV
translator stations are secondary, they are subject to displacement by
primary full power and Class A stations, further reducing their
desirability as partner host stations. Absent an exemption from our
local simulcasting requirement, LPTV and TV translator stations could
be denied the opportunity to implement ATSC 3.0 service until the
Commission eliminates the simulcast requirement.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Other commenters oppose permitting LPTV stations to
transition directly to ATSC 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. We recognize that permitting LPTV and TV translator stations to
transition directly to ATSC 3.0 could deprive those OTA viewers without
ATSC 3.0 TV sets or converter equipment of the important programming
these stations provide. MVPD subscribers could also be affected if
MVPDs are not prepared to carry ATSC 3.0 signals on the date of a
direct transition. Although we recognize that permitting LPTV and TV
translator stations to transition directly may cause some consumer
disruption, in light of the unique circumstances faced by LPTV and TV
translator stations we conclude that providing these stations with the
option to transition directly will best ensure that they are able to
deploy ATSC 3.0 technology.
39. Exempting LPTV and TV translator stations from the local
simulcasting requirement will have the added benefit of allowing these
stations to serve as ``lighthouse'' stations, thereby providing an ATSC
3.0 host option for other full power, Class A, LPTV, and TV translator
stations that wish to partner with them.\51\ LPTV stations could,
therefore, serve an important role in market-wide simulcast
arrangements by permitting other stations to experiment with 3.0
service while maintaining ATSC 1.0 service on their existing facility.
As noted above, our goal is to encourage Next Gen TV broadcasters to
initiate 3.0 service on another facility initially while maintaining
their 1.0 simulcast signal at the station's existing location, when
possible, to help avoid disruption to viewers and MVPDs. LPTV stations
that elect to transition directly and to serve as ATSC 3.0 host
stations could thus play a significant role in facilitating the
conversion to 3.0 technology.\52\ While viewers without ATSC 3.0-
capable equipment would lose access to LPTV and TV translator stations
that elect to transition directly, these stations may also provide
innovative 3.0 programming that could help drive consumer adoption of
such equipment. Thus, on balance, we believe that the benefit of
permitting these stations to transition directly outweighs the
potential harm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ A full power station airing a channel on a partner LPTV
host station would be limited to the LPTV reduced power level on
that channel and would lose its primary interference protections.
\52\ NAB does not object to permitting LPTV stations to
transition directly to ATSC 3.0 and agrees that these stations can
serve an important role in the deployment of Next Gen TV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
40. Finally, our decision to exempt LPTV and TV translator stations
from our local simulcasting requirement will ensure that analog LPTV
and TV translator stations and stations that have been displaced due to
the post-incentive auction repacking process are not forced to build
both an ATSC 1.0 and an ATSC 3.0 facility. The Commission has
determined that LPTV and TV translator stations must complete their
transition to digital service by July 13, 2021.\53\ The Commission
previously changed this deadline to ensure that analog LPTV and TV
translator stations would not be forced to complete their digital
conversion only to find that their newly constructed digital facilities
were displaced as a result of the incentive auction repacking process,
thus necessitating a significant additional expenditure to locate a new
channel and modify their digital facilities accordingly.\54\ Many
digital LPTV stations will also be required to seek new channels and
construct new facilities as a result of the incentive auction. By
exempting LPTV and TV translator stations from the simulcasting
requirement, we similarly avoid forcing
[[Page 5006]]
these stations to make significant expenditures in new ATSC 1.0
facilities by July 13, 2021 only later to be faced with a further
expenditure of resources if the station chooses to convert those
facilities to ATSC 3.0.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ In 2015, the Commission extended the deadline for analog
LPTV and TV translator stations to complete their transition to
digital service. Specifically, the Commission set a digital
transition date for analog LPTV and TV translator stations of 12
months after the completion of the 39-month Post-Auction Transition
Period (the 39-month period during which full power and Class A
stations assigned to new channels in the Incentive Auction repacking
process will transition to their new channels). The Commission has
determined that the 39-month Post-Auction Transition Period will end
on July 13, 2020. Accordingly, the deadline for analog LPTV and TV
translator stations to transition to digital technology is July 13,
2021.
\54\ Absent a change in the deadline to complete construction of
their digital facilities, LPTV and TV translator stations displaced
in the repacking process would have been required to find a new
channel and modify their new digital facilities or cease operations
if they were unable to find a new channel.
\55\ The LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition supports permitting
newly authorized LPTV stations not yet constructed to transition
directly to ATSC 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
41. We decline to restrict the ability of LPTV and TV translator
stations affiliated with a broadcast network to directly transition, as
advocated by ATVA.\56\ We are not persuaded that there is any reasoned
basis to give network affiliated stations less flexibility than other
secondary stations in this respect.\57\ These stations may face the
same challenges finding a simulcast partner as other LPTV and TV
translator stations, and we believe they should have the same
opportunity to serve as potential ATSC 3.0 ``lighthouse'' stations.\58\
We note that we are affording LPTV and TV translator stations with the
opportunity to transition directly, but are not requiring them to do
so.\59\ Thus, any LPTV or TV translator station that wishes to deploy
ATSC 3.0 service may elect to air both an ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 stream
by partnering with another station rather than transitioning directly.
Stations that transition directly could also consider taking steps to
minimize the disruption to viewers, such as offering free converter
devices (e.g., an external tuner dongle, set-top box, or gateway
device) that enable ATSC 1.0-only receivers to be upgraded to receive
ATSC 3.0 transmissions. LPTV and TV translator stations that elect
voluntarily to simulcast must comply with the simulcasting requirements
we adopt herein, including the substantially similar programming
requirement and the coverage requirements related to ATSC 1.0 and 3.0
signals. Applying these requirements to LPTV and TV translator stations
that simulcast is consistent with the goal of our simulcasting
requirement to protect existing viewers and is appropriate in light of
the benefits these stations will receive as a result of their simulcast
license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ ATVA states, however, that it ``takes no position'' on
whether a simulcasting requirement should apply to LPTV stations
that are not carried by any MVPD, not required to be carried by any
MVPD under the must-carry statute, and remain unaffiliated with any
network. ATVA later expressed the view that any exemption from the
simulcast requirement should be limited to stations other than the
top-six rated stations.
\57\ A Commission staff analysis of SNL Kagan data as of Apr.
15, 2017 shows that 42 of 258 LPTV stations are affiliated with a
top-four broadcast network (ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox).
\58\ Network affiliates may also have contractual obligations
that limit their ability to transition directly.
\59\ We agree with ATVA that LPTV and TV translator stations
should have the opportunity to convert to ATSC 3.0 and arrange for
the simulcast of their ATSC 1.0 signal on a partner simulcast host
station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Waiver of the Simulcasting and Local Coverage Requirements
42. We will consider requests for waiver of our local simulcasting
and coverage requirements on a case-by-case basis. This includes
requests from full power and Class A television stations to transition
directly from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 service on the station's existing
facility without providing a 1.0 simulcast as well as requests to air a
1.0 simulcast channel from a host location that does not cover all or a
portion of the station's community of license or from which the station
can provide only a lower signal threshold over the community than that
required by the rules.\60\ We are inclined to consider favorably
requests for waiver where the Next Gen TV station can demonstrate that
it has no viable local simulcasting partner in its market and where the
station agrees to make reasonable efforts to preserve 1.0 service to
existing viewers in its community of license and/or otherwise minimize
the impact on such viewers (for example, by providing free or low cost
ATSC 3.0 converters to viewers). In the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, we sought further comment on two issues related to waivers
and exceptions: (1) Whether to provide further guidance on how we will
evaluate requests for waiver of the local simulcasting requirement; and
(2) whether we should exempt NCE and/or Class A stations (as a class)
from our local simulcasting requirement or adopt a presumptive waiver
standard for such stations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ The Commission may waive its rules if good cause is shown.
We are not inclined to consider favorably requests to change
community of license solely to enable simulcasting. We will,
however, consider a waiver if necessary for a station to comply with
the local simulcasting requirement, based on the facts presented. We
note that the required showing to justify waiver of the community of
license coverage requirement is different from the showing required
by simulcast license applicants that do not qualify for expedited
processing, discussed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
43. Commenters, including both broadcasters and MVPDs, support
waivers of the simulcasting requirement for broadcasters that are
unable to enter into simulcasting arrangements. We are aware that some
full power and Class A stations may face a unique challenge in meeting
our local simulcasting requirement. For example, PTV notes that public
television stations are often not sited based on DMA boundaries because
many statewide networks licensed to state agencies or commissions are
required to serve their entire state regardless of cross-state DMA
boundaries. As a result, certain public stations may find it difficult
to find a simulcast partner. Other stations in small markets and/or
rural areas may face similar challenges in meeting our simulcasting
requirement.\61\ We also recognize that, as the implementation of Next
Gen TV progresses and more stations convert to ATSC 3.0, it may become
increasingly difficult for broadcasters to find suitable partners for
local simulcasting. Our waiver standard is intended to facilitate the
provision of a waiver in these circumstances to ensure that all
stations have the opportunity to participate in the voluntary
deployment of ATSC 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Single-station markets present the most obvious example of
situations in which simulcasting may not be possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Licensing Issues
a. Licensed Simulcast Approach
44. We require that 1.0 and 3.0 channels aired on a partner host
station be licensed as temporary second channels of the originating
broadcaster. That is, the ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals of a Next Gen
TV broadcaster will be two separately authorized companion channels
under the broadcaster's single, unified license.\62\ Next Gen TV
broadcasters will be required to file an application and obtain
Commission approval before a 1.0 simulcast channel or a 3.0 channel
aired on a partner host station can go on the air, and before an
existing 1.0 station can convert to 3.0 operation or back to 1.0
operation. However, as discussed further below, we adopt a streamlined
``one-step'' process for reviewing and approving such applications to
minimize the burden on both Next Gen TV broadcasters and the
Commission.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ The companion channel aired on a partner host station will
be considered part of the guest station's license and may not be
separately assigned to a third party.
\63\ Normally, licensing is a two-step process. A broadcaster
must first file an application for a construction permit (CP) and
obtain approval from the Commission for the CP and then, once
construction is complete, file an application for a license to cover
the CP and wait for Commission approval of the license to cover. We
will process applications seeking changes to facilities and licenses
that require the filing of a construction permit pursuant to our
existing processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
45. The partner host and guest station(s) in a simulcast
arrangement will continue to be licensed separately and each station
will have its own call sign. Each licensee will be independently
subject to all of the Commission's obligations, rules, and policies.
The Commission retains the
[[Page 5007]]
right to enforce any violation of these requirements against one, more
than one, or all parties to a simulcast agreement. As is always the
case, the Commission would take into account all relevant facts and
circumstances in any enforcement action, including the relevant
contractual obligations of the parties involved.
46. We sought comment in the Next Gen TV NPRM on whether simulcasts
should be separately licensed as second channels of the originating
station or treated as multicast streams of the host station.\64\ We
conclude that a licensed simulcast approach is preferable to a
multicast approach for several reasons. First, it will allow NCE
stations to serve as hosts to commercial stations' simulcast
programming. Section 399B of the Communications Act provides that
``[n]o public broadcast station may make its facilities available to
any person for the broadcasting of any advertisement.'' \65\ Under a
multicast approach, an NCE station would be prohibited from hosting the
simulcast programming of a commercial station on a multicast stream
because the stream would be aired on the ``facilities'' of the NCE
licensee. Under the licensed simulcast approach we adopt herein,
however, the ``facilities'' are no longer exclusively the facilities of
the NCE station, as each station has a right to use the facilities
pursuant to its separate license and contractual rights. A commercial
stream aired on a partner NCE station will be separately licensed and
authorized to use the host's channel, therefore permitting an NCE
station to serve as a host to a commercial stream.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ As proposed in the NPRM, we establish a new service group
code of NGDTV in LMS to signify the various classes of ATSC 3.0
stations, including NGDTV for full-service 3.0, NGDTS for DTS/SFN
3.0, NGLPT for low-power translator 3.0 stations, NGDCA for Class A,
and NGLPD for low-power 3.0 stations. This means 3.0 channels will
receive a ``-NG'' suffix to their call signs (e.g., WZYX-NG'') to
contrast to their 1.0 simulcast channels which will keep their
suffixes.
\65\ The Act defines an advertisement as ``any message or other
programming material which is broadcast or otherwise transmitted in
exchange for any remuneration. . . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. Second, the licensed simulcast approach clarifies the carriage
rights of simulcast signals. Because multicast signals are not entitled
to carriage rights, treating simulcast signals as multicast channels
under a host's license raises the question as to whether such signals
have mandatory carriage rights. As discussed below, a Next Gen TV
broadcaster's licensed ATSC 1.0 signal will be entitled to carriage
whether aired on the Next Gen TV broadcaster's own facility or that of
a simulcast host.
48. Third, the licensed simulcast approach makes it clear that the
originating station (and not the host) is responsible for regulatory
compliance regarding its 1.0 simulcast or 3.0 signal being aired on a
host station and gives the Commission clear enforcement authority over
the originating station in the event of a violation of our rules.
b. Licensing Procedure
49. We require that a Next Gen TV broadcaster file an application
with the Commission, and receive approval, before: (1) Moving its 1.0
signal to a temporary simulcast host station or moving its 1.0
simulcast to a different host station, or discontinuing a 1.0 guest
signal; (2) commencing the airing of a 3.0 channel on a 3.0 host
station (that has already converted to 3.0 operation), moving its 3.0
channel to a different host station, or discontinuing a 3.0 guest
signal; or (3) converting its existing station to 3.0 operation or from
3.0 back to 1.0. For all of these applications, we adopt a streamlined
one-step process that will require the filing of only an application
for modification of license (i.e., without first filing an application
for a construction permit), provided no other changes are being
requested in the application that would require the filing of an
application for a construction permit under the Commission's rules.\66\
A broadcaster seeking to air a 1.0 signal on a simulcast host station
or to air a 3.0 signal on a host station is required to file the
appropriate license schedule to FCC Form 2100 identifying, among other
information, the station serving as the host and the technical
facilities of the host station. Where the broadcaster seeks to air its
1.0 signal on a simulcast host station, the broadcaster must also
indicate on the application (1) the predicted population within the
noise limited service contour served by the station's original ATSC 1.0
signal, (2) the predicted population within the noise limited service
contour served by the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal that will lose
the station's ATSC 1.0 service as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas of service loss by providing a
contour overlap map,\67\ and (3) whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal
aired on the host station will serve at least 95 percent of the
predicted population within the noise limited service contour served by
the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal (that is, whether the
application qualifies as a ``checklist'' application eligible for
expedited processing). Alternatively, where a Next Gen TV broadcaster
seeks to air a 3.0 signal on a partner host station, the broadcaster
must indicate in the application the DMA of the originating
broadcaster's facility and the DMA of the host station. The host
station does not need to take action in connection with these
applications if no technical changes are necessary to its
facilities.\68\ We anticipate that in most, if not all, cases, no such
changes will be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ In all other circumstances, a broadcaster must continue to
follow existing Commission processes and rules for modifying their
existing facility through the filing of a construction permit
application followed by an application for license to cover.
(identifying the changes to full power and Class A television
station facilities that require the filing of a construction permit)
and 74.751 (identifying the changes to LPTV and TV translator
stations that require the filing of a construction permit
application). Broadcasters must also continue to notify the
Commission of modifications to their facilities that do not require
the filing of a construction permit as otherwise required by the
rules. By technical or facility changes, we are referring only to
changes that are regulated by the Commission and not to other
changes (i.e., software) that are not regulated by the Commission.
\67\ We therefore agree with ACA that stations must include with
their applications a contour overlap map identifying the areas of
service loss.
\68\ A host station must first make any necessary changes to its
facilities before a guest station may file an application to air an
ATSC 1.0 or 3.0 signal on the host. The Commission will include a
note on the host station's license identifying any ``guest'' ATSC
1.0 or ATSC 3.0 streams being transmitted on the station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
50. While a full power station seeking to change its channel
normally must first submit a petition to amend the DTV Table of
Allotments, as we proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM we do not apply this
process in the context of licensed simulcasting. We conclude that
amendments to the DTV table are not required for these channel changes
as they are temporary and because stations may change locations and
hosts multiple times while local simulcasting is required.
51. A broadcaster seeking to convert its existing station to 3.0
transmissions is required to file the appropriate license schedule to
FCC Form 2100 and, absent a waiver of the local simulcasting
requirement, simultaneously file on the appropriate license schedule to
FCC Form 2100 an application to move its 1.0 signal to a simulcast host
station. Absent a waiver, these broadcasters may not commence 3.0
operation on their existing facility before their 1.0 simulcast begins
airing on the simulcast host station. If a broadcaster seeks to move
its 3.0 or 1.0 simulcast signal to a different host station, it is
required to file the appropriate license schedule to FCC Form 2100 and
wait until it receives Commission approval of the application before
airing the signal on the new host facility.
52. The Commission will act on all applications as quickly as
possible.
[[Page 5008]]
Applications will appear on the Media Bureau's Broadcast Applications
Public Notice, which appears every day in the Daily Digest.\69\ Grant
of an application will also appear in the Daily Digest. We expect
generally to process applications that qualify for expedited processing
within 15 business days after we give notice of the filing of the
application in the Daily Digest and within 60 business days after we
give notice of the filing of the application in the Daily Digest for
applications that do not qualify for expedited processing. A station
may commence operations pursuant to its simulcast agreement only after
grant of the necessary applications and consistent with any other
restrictions placed on stations by the Commission.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ Informal objections may be filed with respect to such
applications.
\70\ Stations will not be permitted to commence ATSC 3.0 or ATSC
1.0 simulcast (on a simulcast host facility) operations pursuant to
automatic program test authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
53. We will treat applications filed to implement simulcasting and
the conversion of a station to ATSC 3.0 operation as applications for
modification of license. While a change in channel is normally a major
change under our rules, we conclude that it is appropriate to treat
channel changes made to comply with the local simulcasting requirement
as minor changes to a license because the guest will be assuming the
authorized technical facilities of the host station, meaning that
compliance with our interference and other technical rules would have
been addressed in licensing the host station.\71\ It also is
appropriate to dispense with the requirement that broadcasters file an
application for a construction permit in connection with ATSC 3.0
deployment-related changes that do not involve a change in the
station's facilities that normally requires prior Commission approval
\72\ because simulcast arrangements will be temporary and may change
over time as more stations convert to 3.0 technology.\73\ In addition,
we find that the streamlined one-step licensing process we adopt herein
is warranted where approval is sought to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on an
existing host facility operating at established parameters. Similarly,
a streamlined process is appropriate for use in connection with a
station converting from 1.0 to 3.0 operation where no technical changes
requiring Commission approval to an existing, licensed facility are
required.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ We proposed to treat such channel changes as minor
modifications in the Next Gen TV NPRM.
\72\ While we proposed to require applicants to file a
construction permit, we adopt a different approach for the reasons
set forth above. In addition, while the Commission required stations
seeking to channel share to apply for a construction permit, we
conclude a more streamlined process is appropriate with respect to
simulcasting arrangements because they are temporary.
\73\ For example, stations may move from one 1.0 simulcast host
to another as more stations in the market convert to 3.0 operations.
\74\ A station can convert from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 in most
cases by simply changing the exciter. Most new transmitters
available today are already ATSC 3.0 compatible. The interference
characteristics of both standards are functionally identical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
54. This one-step process is only slightly more burdensome for
broadcasters than the simple notification procedure, with no Commission
approval required, supported by several broadcast commenters. These
commenters advocate that broadcasters simply notify the Commission of
the station's simulcasting plans, either via a letter or on a form
provided by the Commission. We believe that submission of an
application followed by Commission review and approval is necessary to
ensure compliance with Section 308 of the Communications Act and the
local simulcasting and other requirements we adopt herein. Our
streamlined one-step process provides sufficient flexibility to
broadcasters that may need to modify their simulcasting arrangements as
the deployment of ATSC 3.0 progresses. Finally, as noted above, while
we require that broadcasters provide their simulcast agreements to the
Commission upon request, we do not require them to be filed with their
simulcast applications, thus further simplifying the application
process. We delegate authority to the Media Bureau for the narrow
purpose of amending FCC Form 2100 as necessary to implement the
licensing process adopted herein.
55. In the event a station must make changes that require prior
Commission approval as part of the deployment of ATSC 3.0 (i.e., to
convert a station from 1.0 to 3.0 technology or back to 1.0, to enable
a station to serve as a host for a 1.0 simulcast signal, or to enable a
station that has already converted to 3.0 technology to serve as a host
for a 3.0 signal), we will use the existing two-step (construction
permit and license to cover) application process to approve these
changes.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ For example, if a full power host station needs to install
a new antenna that would normally require the filing of an
application for a construction permit, the station must follow the
Commission's usual two-step licensing process. For example, if the
host station needs to adjust its omnidirectional antenna no more
than two meters above or four meters below its authorized values, it
must file only a license modification application. Stations may make
such minor license modifications when applying to convert their
facility from ATSC 1.0 to 3.0 under the one-step process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Temporary Use of Vacant Channels
56. We sought comment in the Next Gen TV NPRM on whether we should
allow broadcasters to use available or vacant in-band channels to
establish temporary host facilities for ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 channels
for purposes of local simulcasting. We decline to authorize the use of
available channels for this purpose in this Order as we conclude such
action raises a number of issues that require further opportunity for
comment and Commission consideration.
D. MVPD Carriage
57. We discuss in this section the MVPD carriage rights of
broadcasters that choose to deploy ATSC 3.0 service. We conclude that a
Next Gen TV broadcaster's 1.0 simulcast channel will retain mandatory
carriage rights and its 3.0 channel will not have mandatory carriage
rights while the Commission requires local simulcasting. ATSC 1.0
channels relocating to a temporary host facility can retain mandatory
carriage rights which they were exercising at their original location,
provided they continue to qualify for such rights at the host facility
location; we do not permit those channels to gain new mandatory
carriage rights as a result of their new location. In addition, we
require must-carry Next Gen TV broadcasters and retransmission consent
Next Gen TV broadcasters relocating their 1.0 simulcast channel to
provide notice to affected MVPDs at least 90 days in advance of the
move, and 120 days in advance if the move occurs during the incentive
auction repacking period. We decline to adopt any additional rules
regarding the carriage of ATSC 3.0 pursuant to retransmission consent.
Such carriage will be voluntary, and we find that voluntary carriage
issues are best left to marketplace negotiations between broadcasters
and MVPDs. Finally, in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we
tentatively concluded that local simulcasting should not change the
significantly viewed status of a Next Gen TV station.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ Until we address this issue raised in the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, we impose a freeze on the filing of any
requests to change the significantly viewed status of Next Gen TV
stations moving their 1.0 simulcast channel. We note that we need
not address here how local simulcasting may impact the ability of
stations to exercise their network nonduplication and syndicated-
exclusivity rights (exclusivity rules). Because we do not allow Next
Gen TV stations to change their communities of license, exclusivity
zones of protection should not change. To the extent a station files
for a community of license change solely to enable simulcasting, we
will consider the impact on the exclusivity rules on a case-by-case
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5009]]
1. Mandatory Carriage of Next Gen TV Stations
58. The Communications Act establishes slightly different
thresholds for mandatory carriage depending on whether the television
station is full power or low-power, or commercial or noncommercial, and
also depending on whether carriage is sought from a cable operator or
satellite carrier. The carriage rights of commercial stations on cable
systems are set forth in Section 614 of the Act.\77\ The carriage
rights of full power NCE stations on cable systems are set forth in
Section 615 of the Act.\78\ The carriage rights of full power stations
(both commercial and NCE) on satellite carriers are set forth in
Section 338 of the Act.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 534(a), ``[e]ach cable operator shall
carry, on the cable system of that operator, the signals of local
commercial television stations . . . as provided by this section.''
The term ``local commercial television station'' means ``any full
power television broadcast station, other than a qualified
noncommercial educational television station . . . licensed and
operating on a channel regularly assigned to its community by the
Commission that, with respect to a particular cable system, is
within the same television market as the cable system.''
``Television market'' is defined by Commission's rules as a
Designated Market Area (DMA). The must-carry rights of low power
stations, including Class A stations, on cable systems are set forth
in Section 614(c) of the Act. Under very narrow circumstances, such
stations can become ``qualified'' and eligible for must carry. Among
the several requirements for reaching ``qualified'' status with
respect to a particular cable operator, the station must be
``located no more than 35 miles from the cable system's headend.''
\78\ 47 U.S.C. 535(a) provides that ``each cable operator of a
cable system shall carry the signals of qualified noncommercial
educational television stations in accordance with the provisions of
this section.'' A qualified noncommercial educational station can be
considered ``local,'' and thus eligible for mandatory carriage on a
cable system, in one of two ways. It may either be licensed to a
principal community within 50 miles of the system's headend, or
place a ``Grade B'' (noise-limited service contour) signal over the
headend.
\79\ A full power ``television broadcast station'' is entitled
to request carriage by a satellite carrier any time that carrier
relies on the statutory copyright license in 17 U.S.C. 122 to
retransmit the signal of any other ``local'' station (i.e., one
located in the same DMA). 47 U.S.C. 338(a)(1) (``[e]ach satellite
carrier providing . . . secondary transmissions to subscribers
located within the local market of a television broadcast station of
a primary transmission made by that station shall carry upon request
the signals of all television broadcast stations located within that
local market. . .''). This is commonly referred to as the ``carry
one, carry all'' requirement. A ``television broadcast station'' is
defined as ``an over-the-air commercial or noncommercial television
broadcast station licensed by the Commission.'' Low-power stations,
including Class A stations, do not have satellite carriage rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Only 1.0 Has Mandatory Carriage Rights
59. We adopt the proposal in the Next Gen TV NPRM \80\ that MVPDs
must continue to carry Next Gen TV broadcasters' ATSC 1.0 signals,
pursuant to their statutory mandatory carriage obligations, and that
MVPDs will not be required to carry broadcasters' ATSC 3.0 signals
during the period when local simulcasting is required. Most commenters,
including Petitioners, other broadcasters, MVPDs and Consumer Groups
support this result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ We note that the Petitioners state that MVPDs ``should not
be obligated to carry'' a Next Gen TV broadcaster's ATSC 3.0 signal
and that MVPDs could satisfy their obligation to carry a Next Gen TV
station's signal by carrying the station's ATSC 1.0 signal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
60. We interpret the Communications Act to accord mandatory
carriage rights to the signals of ATSC 1.0 simulcast channels,
including those that are hosting another 1.0 channel and those that are
guest licensees at a temporary host location. Thus, stations
broadcasting in the mandatory ATSC 1.0 transmission standard will
retain carriage rights. Nothing in the Act requires a station to occupy
an entire 6 MHz channel in order to be eligible for must-carry rights;
rather, the station must simply be a licensee eligible for carriage
under the applicable provision of the Act. Under our local simulcasting
rules, guest and host 1.0 simulcast stations will be separately
licensed and authorized to operate on the same 6 MHz channel (i.e., the
host's original channel). Therefore, each 1.0 station may properly
assert mandatory carriage rights under the Act because each will be
``licensed and operating on a channel'' that is ``regularly assigned to
its community'' by the Commission. This interpretation of the Act is
consistent with our decisions authorizing broadcast channel sharing, in
which the Commission found that both licensees of a shared channel
would have carriage rights.\81\ No commenters oppose this conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ 47 U.S.C. 534, 535, and 338 accord carriage rights to
licensees without regard to whether they occupy a full 6 MHz channel
or share a channel with another licensee. Nothing in the
Communications Act requires a station to occupy an entire 6 MHz
channel in order to be eligible for must-carry rights; rather, the
station must simply be a licensee eligible for carriage under the
applicable provision of the Communications Act. 47 U.S.C. 534
defines a ``local commercial television station'' as any commercial
full power station ``licensed and operating on a channel regularly
assigned to its community by the Commission . . . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
61. We also conclude that Next Gen TV broadcasters will have
mandatory carriage rights for their 1.0 signals and not their 3.0
signals while the Commission requires local simulcasting. Most
commenters agree with this result, even though they may differ on how
to achieve it. Thus, a Next Gen TV broadcaster will choose between must
carry or retransmission consent for its ATSC 1.0 signal, but may only
pursue carriage via retransmission consent for its ATSC 3.0 signal.
This approach is consistent with the framework used during the DTV
transition. In that context, the Commission found that, with regard to
licensees that were simultaneously broadcasting analog and digital
signals, analog signals would have mandatory carriage rights during the
DTV transition and digital signals would not. That is, a broadcaster
would choose between must carry or retransmission consent for its
analog signal but could only pursue carriage via retransmission consent
for its digital signal. The Commission concluded that the
Communications Act did not require cable operators to carry both the
digital and analog signals (also referred to as ``dual carriage'') of a
DTV broadcaster during the DTV transition when television stations were
still broadcasting analog signals.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ The Commission explained that the Communications Act is
ambiguous on the issue of dual carriage and concluded that mandating
dual carriage was not necessary either to advance the governmental
interests identified by Congress in enacting the must carry statute
or to effectuate the DTV transition. The Commission observed that
doubling the carriage rights of must carry stations would
substantially increase the burdens on cable operators' free speech.
The Commission concluded, in the absence of a clear statutory
requirement for dual carriage, it would not impose such burdens on
cable operators' free speech.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
62. We make the analogous finding here that the Act does not
require carriage of both an ATSC 1.0 and an ATSC 3.0 signal of the same
broadcaster.\83\ Because of the local simulcasting requirement, there
will be a redundancy of basic content between the 1.0 and the 3.0
signals. If we imposed a must carry requirement for both signals, cable
operators could be required to carry double the number of television
signals of virtually identical content. Moreover, at the initial stages
of the voluntary deployment of 3.0, consumers likely will not have the
equipment to allow them to display the 3.0 signals. Requiring carriage
of such signals therefore would not further the objective of must-carry
requirements to promote the availability of OTA broadcasting. Thus, we
agree with
[[Page 5010]]
NCTA and other MVPD commenters that ``requiring carriage of the 3.0
signal in addition to the 1.0 signal would result in virtually no
incremental viewership of broadcast programming while seriously
compounding the burden on cable operators' available bandwidth.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ As the Commission found in the DTV transition context, we
likewise find here that the Communications Act is ambiguous on the
issue of dual carriage of 1.0 and 3.0 signals and conclude that
mandating dual carriage is not necessary to either advance the
governmental interests identified by Congress in enacting the must
carry statute or to effectuate voluntary 3.0 deployment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
63. In addition, a Next Gen TV broadcaster will not be able to
exercise mandatory carriage rights with respect to its 3.0 signal
instead of its 1.0 signal, nor will it have mandatory carriage rights
even if its 3.0 signal is the only signal being broadcast. In other
words, under no circumstances will we recognize mandatory carriage
rights for 3.0 signals while the Commission requires local
simulcasting.\84\ The Act does not specify whether there can be
mandatory carriage rights in circumstances where a broadcaster has made
a voluntary choice to stop broadcasting using the mandatory
transmission standard. In addition, the Act gives the Commission
discretion to ``establish any changes in the signal carriage
requirements'' for purposes of advancements in technology.\85\ We find
that mandating any MVPD carriage of the 3.0 signal at this time would
be antithetical to a voluntary and market-driven 3.0 deployment for all
stakeholders and would not advance the interests under the must-carry
regime.\86\ The record shows that MVPDs would need to purchase new
equipment to receive 3.0 signals and down convert them to 1.0 so they
can redistribute them to their subscribers. If MVPDs were required to
receive and redistribute the 3.0 signals (without down conversion) to
subscribers, then MVPDs would also face burdens on system capacity.
Thus, allowing a broadcaster to demand mandatory carriage of its 3.0
signal instead of its 1.0 signal would impose significantly greater
costs and burdens on MVPDs. We find that it would not be reasonable to
interpret the Act in a manner that would compel MVPDs to incur these
added costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ As discussed above, we require Next Gen TV stations to
simulcast, except for LPTV stations and TV translator stations. 47
U.S.C. 534(h)(2)(D) requires LPTV stations to deliver a ``good
quality'' over-the-air signal to the cable headend, which the LPTV
station cannot cure through alternate means. We interpret a ``good
quality'' to not include a 3.0 signal at the present time given the
lack of receive equipment and the MVPD costs to receive it. Thus, a
3.0-only LPTV station could not qualify for mandatory carriage.
\85\ 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(B) requires the Commission ``to ensure
cable carriage of such broadcast signals of local commercial
television stations which have been changed . . . .'' However, until
there is widespread adoption of 3.0 technology by OTA viewers,
mandatory carriage of 3.0 signals would not serve the goals of
promoting OTA broadcasting. In addition, MVPDs currently are not
capable of receiving and retransmitting the 3.0 signal and will
incur significant costs to obtain such capabilities when 3.0
technology does become available.
\86\ In Turner II, a majority of the Supreme Court recognized
that the must-carry provisions serve the important and interrelated
governmental interests of: (1) `` `preserving the benefits of free,
over-the-air broadcast television,' '' and (2) promoting `` `the
widespread dissemination of information from a multiplicity of
sources.' ''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
64. Although the Commission did recognize mandatory carriage rights
for digital-only stations during the DTV transition, that transition
was mandated by statute. By contrast, the decision to broadcast a 3.0
signal is strictly voluntary, and it remains uncertain if all
broadcasters will ultimately choose to provide 3.0 service. We disagree
with ONE Media that we should accord mandatory carriage rights to a
3.0-only station if that station could not find a viable simulcast
partner. Even in circumstances where a station is unable to find a 1.0
simulcast partner, deployment of 3.0 service is a voluntary choice on
the part of the broadcaster and 3.0 carriage would require MVPDs to
incur the significant costs and burdens described above. Given that 3.0
deployment is intended to be voluntary for all stakeholders, we find
that a broadcaster's decision to operate only in ATSC 3.0 must not
require MVPDs to incur costs associated with receiving and processing
the 3.0 signals before the MVPD is ready and willing to do so.
65. In support of its argument that 3.0-only stations should be
entitled to mandatory carriage rights, ONE Media also contends that
``ATSC 3.0 decoders will be readily available by the time stations
initiate 3.0 broadcasts.'' \87\ Even assuming this is true, carriage of
an ATSC 3.0 signal would still require the MVPDs to buy such 3.0
decoders. Although some MVPDs may choose to purchase 3.0 decoders if it
becomes a more effective and/or less costly way to redistribute must-
carry signals to their subscribers, we find that MVPDs must not be
required to do so as a result of the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0.
We also disagree with NAB that a 3.0-only station could ``retain the
same carriage rights it would have at its location if it were
transmitting using ATSC 1.0, but must arrange for the delivery of its
signal to any MVPDs required to carry the station's signal in a format
the MVPD is capable of receiving.'' We agree with ATVA that
broadcasters cannot secure mandatory carriage rights ``by promising to
deliver signals `in a format the MVPD is capable of receiving.' '' As
explained by ATVA, ``[b]roadcasters can, of course, deliver signals for
which they have must carry rights using alternative means. But if a
broadcaster transmits only in ATSC 3.0, there is no off-air signal for
which the broadcaster has must-carry rights. How a broadcaster chooses
to deliver that signal has no legal relevance.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ The Independent Television Group (ITG) also expresses
concern that not providing stations with ATSC 3.0 must-carry rights
``will frustrate and delay adoption [of ATSC 3.0] in small and
medium markets.'' ITG, thus, suggests that the Commission ``defer a
decision on carriage rights'' until after consumer equipment becomes
available rather than for the duration of the mandatory local
simulcasting period. As explained herein, we find that a
broadcaster's decision to operate in ATSC 3.0 must not require MVPDs
to incur costs associated with receiving and processing the 3.0
signals before the MVPD is ready and willing to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Rights of Relocated 1.0 Simulcast Channel
66. Having established that mandatory carriage rights will attach
only to an ATSC 1.0 signal, we now turn to the issue of whether, and,
if so, to what extent, 1.0 mandatory carriage rights move to the
temporary host location, if the broadcaster opts to relocate its 1.0
simulcast channel to a host's facility.\88\ We find that, to assert 1.0
mandatory carriage rights, the 1.0 channel must continue to qualify for
such rights at the temporary location from which it will transmit the
1.0 signal; however, we interpret the statute to not allow such a
temporary move to provide the station with new or expanded carriage
rights not previously held and exercised by the 1.0 station. Our
conclusion here interprets the must-carry statute to minimize the
burdens on MVPDs to only those necessary to advance the interests of
the must-carry regime. Allowing expansion of 1.0 mandatory carriage
rights through local simulcasting also would be inconsistent with the
purpose of our local simulcasting requirement, which is to maintain 1.0
service to existing viewers.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ In the Next Gen TV NPRM, based on the proposed approach in
the Channel Sharing Outside Auction Context NPRM, the Commission
proposed that a broadcaster's mandatory carriage rights would track
its relocated ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel. Under the approach we
adopt here (i.e., declining to require carriage of 3.0 signal)), a
Next Gen TV broadcaster's mandatory carriage rights will not change
as a result of the Next Gen TV deployment if the 1.0 simulcast
channel remains at the Next Gen TV broadcaster's existing facility
(assuming no changes to the existing facility).
\89\ Our conclusion is also consistent with the Commission's
recent order authorizing channel sharing outside the auction
context.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
67. A Next Gen TV broadcaster's 1.0 mandatory carriage rights will
be determined based on the location from which the 1.0 signal is being
transmitted.\90\ We recognize that, in
[[Page 5011]]
certain situations, stations may no longer qualify for mandatory
carriage rights at a temporary host location; however, we find that it
would be inconsistent with the must-carry statute and unduly burdensome
for MVPDs to require them to carry a 1.0 signal based on carriage
rights at a different location from that which the signal is being
broadcast. Because full-power commercial stations must remain within
their DMA \91\ and must retain and continue to serve their current
communities of license with their 1.0 simulcast channel, their carriage
rights are unlikely to change.\92\ By contrast, the 1.0 cable carriage
rights of NCE, Class A and LPTV stations may be affected in certain
situations. For example, an NCE station that qualifies for carriage
based on its contour encompassing the cable headend cannot continue to
qualify for carriage rights at the temporary host location if the shift
in contour means the station can no longer cover the cable headend.\93\
Similarly, Class A and LPTV stations may no longer qualify for cable
carriage at the temporary location if the change in transmitter
location means the station will be located more than 35 miles from the
cable system's headend, or if the shift in coverage area means the
station can no longer deliver a good quality 1.0 signal to the cable
headend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ Full-power commercial stations generally are entitled to
mandatory carriage throughout their local market area, so a shift in
coverage area, community of license, or transmitter of a full-power
commercial station is unlikely to change which cable systems must
carry the station, provided there is no change in DMA and the
station agrees to bear the costs to deliver a good quality signal to
the cable operator. Noncommercial educational (NCE) stations' cable
carriage rights are determined based on whether the relevant cable
headend is located within 50 miles of the station's community of
license or if the headend is located within the station's noise
limited service contour (NLSC). NCE station's satellite carriage
rights, however, are based on their local market area. Cable
carriage rights of a Class A and LPTV station depend on, among other
things, if (i) it is not located in the same county or other
political subdivision (of a State) as a full-power station; (ii) its
transmitter is within 35 miles of the cable system's principal
headend; and (iii) it delivers a good quality signal to that headend
(although, unlike NCE and full power commercial stations, it will
have no right to improve the quality of its signal to meet the
signal quality threshold). Class A and LPTV stations do not have
satellite carriage rights. Therefore, a change in coverage area,
community of license, or transmitter location could affect which
cable systems must carry an NCE, Class A or LPTV station.
\91\ We agree with ATVA that 1.0 simulcast channels must remain
within their same DMA to avoid complications with carriage rights.
Consistent with the channel sharing context, we find that
disallowing DMA changes would minimize the potential impact of local
simulcasting on MVPDs because carriage rights on a particular MVPD
system generally depend on the station's DMA. ``Because satellite
and cable carriage rights on a particular MVPD system generally
depend on the station's DMA, prohibiting moves that would result in
a change of DMA will minimize the potential impact of channel
sharing on MVPDs.'' We also agree with ATVA that ``[p]ermitting an
ATSC 1.0 signal to move to a different local market could trigger
additional copyright royalties as well''.
\92\ We note that a full-power commercial station's priority for
cable carriage with respect to other in-market stations affiliated
with the same network may be affected if we allow the station to
change its 1.0 channel's community of license via a waiver. Based on
existing carriage rules, in the event the 1.0 simulcast channel does
not reach the cable headend or satellite local receive facility, the
Next Gen TV broadcaster must deliver a good quality 1.0 signal to
the MVPD either over-the-air or by alternate means, or must agree to
bear the costs associated with the delivery of such good quality 1.0
signal to the MVPD.
\93\ In addition, we note that an NCE station that qualifies for
mandatory carriage because the relevant cable headend is located
within 50 miles of its community of license cannot continue to
qualify for mandatory carriage at the temporary host location if the
station is allowed to change its community of license via a waiver
to outside of the 50 miles from the headend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
68. We disagree with Petitioners and other broadcasters that, in
1.0 channel relocation situations, 1.0 mandatory carriage rights could
and should remain unchanged and be determined based on the original
facility. Petitioners argue that, under a licensed simulcast approach,
which we adopt above, because both the 1.0 and 3.0 signal will be under
the same license, the broadcaster can designate its 1.0 channel as its
``primary video stream'' entitled to mandatory carriage rights, even if
that signal is relocated to a new location. This argument does not
recognize that the 1.0 and 3.0 signals are each a distinct signal
transmitted on separate channels and are not two programming streams
transmitted together on the same channel.\94\ Although the 1.0 signal
is a separately authorized channel under the originating station's
license, it is not on, or otherwise considered part of, the same
channel as the originating station's 3.0 signal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ We note that the reference to a broadcaster's ``primary
video stream'' in the DTV context relates to the question of whether
multicast streams should be entitled to mandatory carriage and not
the question of whether the analog and digital signal should be
carried (dual carriage) during the DTV transition. As discussed
above, we are not treating a 1.0 simulcast signal as a multicast
stream, but rather as a second companion channel of the Next Gen TV
licensee, based on the DTV transition context.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
69. To minimize carriage burdens on MVPDs that could result from a
1.0 station's temporary move, we also interpret the statute to not
allow a station's temporary move to a 1.0 host facility to provide the
station with new or expanded mandatory carriage rights. Allowing a 1.0
simulcast channel to gain new or expanded mandatory carriage rights due
to the temporary and voluntary relocation of the 1.0 signal to a host
station's facility could pose significant burdens on MVPDs that would
not advance the interests of the must-carry regime nor the purpose of
local simulcasting. In the channel sharing context, the Commission
determined that carriage rights would be based on the shared location
and observed that certain stations may gain carriage on some cable
systems, but lose carriage on others, as a result of the movements of
their facilities or the changes in their communities of license. Unlike
the channel sharing context, Next Gen TV broadcasters are not
relinquishing the station at their original channel, but rather will
continue to operate on it and will ultimately return to it when the
local simulcasting requirement ends. Moreover, broadcasters may need to
relocate 1.0 simulcast channels multiple times while local simulcasting
is required, thus further burdening MVPDs if carriage rights could
expand at every move. Finally, any expansion of 1.0 service due to such
relocations will be temporary and will not serve to maintain existing
1.0 service or to preserve over-the-air broadcast viewership.
Therefore, we find that a guest licensee's 1.0 simulcast channel moved
to a temporary host facility may assert mandatory carriage rights only
if it (1) qualified for, and has been exercising, mandatory carriage
rights at its original location and (2) continues to qualify for
mandatory carriage at the host facility, including (but not limited to)
delivering a good quality 1.0 signal to the cable system principal
headend or satellite carrier local receive facility, or agreeing to be
responsible for the costs of delivering such 1.0 signal to the
MVPD.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ Under our existing must-carry rules, broadcasters are
required to bear the costs of delivering a good quality signal to
MVPDs. The rules, however, do not apply to the costs on MVPDs of
receiving and redistributing the signal to their subscribers and so
MVPDs generally assume these costs. Such costs are generally viewed
as the costs of doing business as MVPDs. MVPDs, however, ask us to
require Next Gen TV broadcasters to reimburse MVPDs for the costs
associated with the reception and processing of 1.0 simulcasts. We
decline to do so. We agree with PTV that receiving and
redistributing broadcast signals are ``a basic cost of doing
business for an MVPD.'' We recognize that we reimbursed such costs
to MVPDs in the incentive auction context. The reimbursement of
MVPDs in connection with the incentive auction was mandated by
statute. 47 U.S.C. 1452(b)(4)(A)(ii). The costs incurred due to
local simulcasting will occur on a market-driven basis and are
properly borne by the MVPDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
70. Market Modification. The relocation of a 1.0 simulcast channel
to a temporary host facility (even though it would remain within the
station's DMA) raises the possibility that the station may be able to
reach new communities outside of its DMA. We are unlikely to rule
favorably on a request by a full power commercial station that
relocates
[[Page 5012]]
its 1.0 simulcast channel to modify its market \96\ to add new
communities outside of its DMA based on a temporary shift in its 1.0
service contour.\97\ This approach is consistent with our conclusion
above that stations will not be able to expand the mandatory carriage
rights of an ATSC 1.0 signal by relocating to a temporary 1.0 host
facility. As discussed above, any expansion of 1.0 service due to such
relocations will be temporary and will not serve to maintain existing
1.0 service or to preserve over-the-air broadcast viewership.\98\ In
addition, because 1.0 service relocations will be temporary, we will
disfavor a request by a cable system or satellite carrier to modify a
1.0 simulcast station's market to delete communities based on the
temporary shift in the 1.0 station's service contour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ Market modification is a process established by statute
that allows the Commission to modify the boundaries of a particular
full power commercial station's local television market assignment
for cable or satellite carriage purposes. Each full power commercial
television station is assigned to a local market defined by the
Designated Market Area (DMA) in which it is located, as determined
by the Nielsen Company (Nielsen). Sections 338(l) and 614(h)(1)(C)
of the Communications Act permit the Commission, in response to a
written request to add communities to, or delete communities from, a
station's local market to better reflect marketplace conditions. 47
U.S.C. 338(l)(1), 534(h)(1)(C). The Commission determines whether to
grant a market modification based on consideration of five statutory
factors that allow petitioners to demonstrate that a particular
station provides or does not provide local service to a specific
community. Full power commercial television stations and cable
systems may file cable market modification petitions and full power
commercial television stations, satellite carriers, and county
governments may file satellite market modification petitions. We
note that market modifications are not available to NCE, Class A or
LPTV stations.
\97\ We note that the scope of a station's signal is only one
aspect of our analysis under factor two, which is one of five
statutory factors which the Commission must consider in deciding
whether to grant or deny a market modification request. Whether a
full power commercial station loses its ability to exercise its
carriage rights in particular communities depends on whether a
market modification is sought and the application of these statutory
factors and other relevant considerations. In this context, the
temporary nature of local simulcasting and the availability of a 3.0
signal in the community at issue are appropriate additional
considerations for evaluating a station's local connection to the
community.
\98\ In other words, we conclude that any increase in mandatory
carriage obligations on MVPDs would not be warranted to advance the
interests of the must-carry regime or local simulcasting. Local
simulcasting is intended to preserve 1.0 viewership, not permanently
expand such viewership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Notice to MVPDs About Relocation of 1.0 Simulcast Channel
71. We require all Next Gen TV broadcasters relocating their 1.0
simulcast channel (e.g., moving to a temporary host facility,
subsequently moving to a different host, or returning to its original
facility) to provide notice to those MVPDs that: (1) No longer will be
required to carry the station's 1.0 signal due to the relocation; or
(2) currently carry the station's 1.0 signal from the existing location
and will continue to be obligated to carry the station's 1.0 signal
from the new location.\99\ The Next Gen TV NPRM sought comment on what
appropriate notice to MVPDs would be, noting that the Petition proposed
that must-carry broadcasters should give notice to MVPDs at least 60
days in advance of relocating their 1.0 simulcast channel to a
temporary host facility. As suggested by AT&T, we require all
broadcasters to give notice to MVPDs: (1) At least 120 days in advance
of relocating their 1.0 simulcast channel to a temporary host facility
if the relocation occurs during the post-incentive auction transition
period; \100\ and (2) at least 90 days in advance of relocating their
1.0 simulcast channel to a temporary host facility if the relocation
occurs after the post-incentive auction transition period. The 90-day
notice requirement is consistent with the rules adopted by the
Commission in the channel sharing context, and we are persuaded by AT&T
and other MVPDs that additional time is needed during the 39-month
repacking period because of the added complications and burdens during
that period.\101\ If the anticipated date of the 1.0 service relocation
changes, the station must send a further notice to affected MVPDs
informing them of the new anticipated date for 1.0 service relocation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ Our rules here are similar to those adopted by the
Commission in the channel sharing context outside of the incentive
auction. In this regard, as the notice provision in the channel
sharing context applies to all broadcasters, we agree with ATVA that
this notice requirement for local simulcasting must apply to all
broadcasters. We also agree with ATVA that a ``single set of rules
for all broadcasters would promote efficiency and prevent consumer
disruption.''
\100\ The Commission has determined that the 39-month Post-
Auction Transition Period will end on July 13, 2020.
\101\ We are not persuaded by NCTA that six months' advance
notice is generally warranted, but we will consider waivers
requesting additional time if good cause is shown. We note that ONE
Media disagreed with any advance notice requirement, but their
position was premised on mandatory carriage rights remaining at the
original facility, which we decided will not occur in 1.0 relocation
situations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
72. Consistent with the channel sharing context and AT&T's
proposal, the notice must contain the following information: (1) Date
and time of the 1.0 channel change; (2) the 1.0 channel occupied by the
station before and after commencement of local simulcasting; (3)
modification, if any, to antenna position, location, or power levels;
(4) stream identification information, including program numbers for
each programming stream; and (5) engineering staff contact information.
If any of this information changes, an amended notification must be
sent. Stations may choose whether to provide notice via a letter
notification \102\ or electronically via email, if pre-arranged with
the relevant MVPD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ Letter notifications to MVPDs must be sent by certified
mail, return receipt requested to the MVPD's address in the FCC's
Online Public Inspection File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have an online file, notices
must be sent to the cable system's official address of record
provided in the system's most recent filing in the FCC's Cable
Operations and Licensing System (COALS). For MVPDs with no official
address in OPIF or COALS, the letter must be sent to the MVPD's
official corporate address registered with their State of
incorporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Retransmission Consent Issues
73. Beyond the notice requirement mentioned above, we do not adopt
any rules related to voluntary carriage of 3.0 signals through
retransmission consent at this time. The Next Gen TV NPRM sought
comment on issues related to the voluntary carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals
through the retransmission consent process. MVPD commenters express the
concern that Next Gen TV broadcasters could use the retransmission
consent process to compel carriage of 3.0 signals before consumer
demand and market circumstances warrant. To address those concerns,
they request that we require parties to (1) negotiate for carriage of
3.0 signals separately from carriage of 1.0 signals, (2) nullify
existing contractual clauses that would require MVPDs to carry 3.0
signals, and (3) in the event of a good faith complaint, subpoena
negotiation-related documents under a protective order to overcome any
non-disclosure provisions.\103\ NTCA requests that we prohibit carriage
of ATSC 3.0 signals via retransmission consent. Broadcasters, on the
other hand, urge us to allow the marketplace to resolve voluntary
carriage issues without adopting any new retransmission consent rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ Although commenters argue that we have the legal authority
to adopt retransmission consent rules related to carriage, no
commenter argues that the statute compels us to adopt such rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
74. We conclude that it is premature to address any issues that may
arise with respect to the voluntary carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals before
broadcasters begin transmitting in this new voluntary standard.\104\
Therefore, we decline to
[[Page 5013]]
adopt any new rules regarding retransmission consent in this proceeding
and will allow these issues at the outset to be addressed through
marketplace negotiations. We make clear, however, that MVPDs are under
no statutory or regulatory obligation to carry any 3.0 signals and
remind parties of the statutory requirement that they negotiate in good
faith.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ ACA requests that the Commission ``clarify that cable
operators and broadcasters can lawfully agree in retransmission
consent agreements to the downconversion of ATSC 3.0 signals,
notwithstanding the `material degradation' provisions in the
Communications Act.'' Letter from Ross J. Lieberman, American Cable
Ass'n, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 16-142 et
al., at 1 (filed Nov. 9, 2017). See 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(A),
535(g)(2). As we state above, 3.0 signals do not have must-carry
rights, and an MVPD's decision as to whether or not to carry an ATSC
3.0 signal via retransmission consent can be resolved through
marketplace negotiations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. FCC Public Interest Obligations and Other FCC Rules
75. In this section, we address several additional topics related
to the voluntary deployment of Next Gen TV. First, we explain that Next
Gen TV broadcasters are subject to our broadcast rules. Second, we
decline to adopt a requirement that television broadcast receivers
include ATSC 3.0-compatible receivers. Third, we require broadcasters
to notify the public about their deployment of Next Gen TV service.
Fourth, we decline to change the fees that we charge broadcasters that
offer ancillary services at this time.\105\ And finally, we reiterate
that the Commission will not use the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund to
reimburse costs associated with ATSC 3.0 capability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ We note that three commenters expressed concern about
today's action implicating consumer privacy, but none offered any
evidence or substantiation to support their speculative assertions
about such harm or any alternatives to address the alleged harm. In
the absence of such evidence, we decline to alter today's action to
address their conclusory assertions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Applicability of Public Interest Obligations and Other Broadcast
Rules to Next Gen TV
76. We require Next Gen TV broadcasters to comply with all of our
broadcast rules, including, but not limited to, our rules regarding
foreign ownership, political broadcasting, children's programming,
equal employment opportunities, public inspection file, indecency,
sponsorship identification, contests, the CALM Act, the Emergency Alert
System (EAS), and accessibility for people with disabilities. As
television stations engaged in ``broadcasting'' under the Act, Next Gen
TV stations will be public trustees with a responsibility to serve the
``public interest, convenience, and necessity.'' In the Petition,
Petitioners suggest that broadcasters implementing ATSC 3.0 should
remain subject to all relevant Commission rules, and commenters
overwhelmingly support applying the same public interest obligations
that apply to broadcasters transmitting under the current ATSC 1.0
standard to those transmitting using the ATSC 3.0 standard. We agree
and conclude that all of our broadcast rules that currently apply when
a broadcaster is providing a free, over-the-air video stream broadcast
in ATSC 1.0 will apply equally when it is providing a free, over-the-
air video stream broadcast in ATSC 3.0.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ We note that the public interest obligations and other
broadcast rules will apply to all ATSC 3.0 video programming
streams, except that Next Gen TV broadcasters will be required to
use A/322 only with respect to the primary video programming stream.
Given that the local simulcasting requirement adopted herein is
temporary, we will not apply the broadcast ownership rules in any
situation where airing an ATSC 3.0 signal or an ATSC 1.0 simulcast
on a temporary host station's facility would result in a potential
violation of those rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
77. With respect to accessibility of Next Gen TV programming, we
emphasize that broadcasters that choose to deploy ATSC 3.0 are expected
to comply fully with all relevant Part 79 requirements. Among other
requirements, these rules require television broadcasters to ensure
that all new, nonexempt English language and Spanish language
programming distributed on their channels is closed captioned; that
closed captioning contained in all programming received from video
programming providers is passed through; and that local emergency
information is accessible to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing
and to persons who are blind or have visual disabilities. These rules
also require local TV station affiliates of ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC
located in the top 60 TV markets to provide a specified number of hours
per calendar quarter of video-described prime time and/or children's
programming.\107\ In addition, Next Gen TV receivers and other
equipment with ATSC 3.0 tuners must comply with all applicable Part 79
rules, including closed captioning decoder requirements, video
description and emergency information accessibility requirements, and
requirements for user interfaces, programming guides, and menus.\108\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ Currently, commercial television broadcast stations that
are affiliated with ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC and located in the top 60
TV markets must provide 50 hours of video description per calendar
quarter during prime time or children's programming. Beginning July
1, 2018, covered stations must also provide an additional 37.5 hours
of video description per calendar quarter between 6 a.m. and
midnight.
\108\ NAB asserts that the ATSC 3.0 standard includes the
accessibility tools necessary to comply with the Commission's rules
and that Next Gen TV devices will fully meet their accessibility
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
78. As the Consumer Groups recommend, we clarify that MVPDs that
agree to carry ATSC 3.0 signals must comply with 47 CFR 79.1(c), which
spells out the requirements for video programming distributors to pass
through and maintain the quality of closed captions. We also clarify
that the use of image overlays or rasterized textual content will not
relieve Next Gen TV broadcasters of their obligation to provide textual
closed captions in accordance with Part 79 of the Commission's rules.
2. Next Gen TV Tuner Mandate
79. We revise our rules to make clear that there is no Next Gen TV
tuner mandate. TV receivers capable of receiving ATSC 3.0 signals are
not yet available in the U.S. Without revising our existing rules,
television receivers would be required to include ATSC 3.0 tuners when
broadcasters begin transmitting ATSC 3.0 signals. Specifically, 47 CFR
15.117(b), the rule implementing the Commission's authority under the
1962 All Channel Receiver Act (ACRA), provides that ``TV broadcast
receivers shall be capable of adequately receiving all channels
allocated by the Commission to the television broadcast service.''
Section 303(s) of the Act, as codified by ACRA, grants the Commission
``from time to time, as public convenience, interest, or necessity
requires'' the ``authority to require that apparatus designed to
receive television pictures broadcast simultaneously with sound be
capable of adequately receiving all frequencies allocated by the
Commission to television broadcasting.'' This provision leaves it to
the Commission's discretion when to require that television receivers
be capable of receiving all television broadcast frequencies. We
conclude that a tuner mandate is unnecessary at this time given that
the deployment of ATSC 3.0 will be voluntary and market-driven and that
broadcasters will continue to transmit ATSC 1.0 signals indefinitely.
We agree with commenters that consumer demand will drive the inclusion
of ATSC 3.0 tuners in television receivers. Accordingly, we are
revising 47 CFR 15.117(b) to make clear that this rule does not apply
to ATSC 3.0.
80. We are not persuaded by ATBA's argument that a Next Gen TV
tuner mandate for all television receivers, as well as smartphones and
other mobile devices designed to receive and display television
signals, is critical to the preservation of LPTV service. ATBA asserts
that repacking following the incentive auction will displace thousands
of LPTV stations and the
[[Page 5014]]
more flexible characteristics of Next Gen TV may allow displaced LPTV
stations to find spectrum in places where a displacement channel would
otherwise be impossible. ATBA further asserts that LPTV stations may
wish to be early adopters of Next Gen TV to distinguish their service
and ensuring that Next Gen TV tuners are in all receive devices will
enhance the service that LPTV stations can provide to the public.
Although we are exempting LPTV stations from the local simulcasting
requirement and allowing them to transition directly to ATSC 3.0
service, we do not believe that a Next Gen TV tuner mandate is
necessary to ensure the survival of the LPTV service. As discussed
above, we expect that once broadcasters begin transmitting in ATSC 3.0,
consumer demand for the advanced features of Next Gen TV will propel
the manufacture and distribution of TV receivers with ATSC 3.0 tuners.
We also agree with commenters that the incorporation of ATSC 3.0 tuners
into smartphones and other mobile devices should be driven by consumer
demand.
81. We agree with commenters that it is unnecessary to require that
all TV receivers sold after a specified date have an HDMI port to
permit attachment of a converter device, such as an external tuner
dongle, set-top box, or gateway device, that would enable the receivers
to be easily upgradeable to receive ATSC 3.0 transmissions. The Public
Interest Groups observe that in the past three years in which Consumer
Reports has been testing new televisions, all of the tested devices
contained at least one HDMI port. The Public Interest Groups assert
that a consumer would be hard-pressed to purchase a new television
today or in the future that did not have an HDMI port. Moreover, NAB
suggests that an HDMI port requirement could be counterproductive and
harmful to consumers, locking manufacturers into an unnecessary cost
associated with a specific technology regardless of marketplace
developments.
3. On-Air Notice to Consumers About Deployment of ATSC 3.0 Service and
ATSC 1.0 Simulcasting
82. As discussed below, we are adopting consumer education
requirements modeled on the consumer education requirements adopted in
connection with the incentive auction for broadcasters that will
transition to new channels post-auction. Consumer education will be
crucial to the successful deployment of Next Gen TV service and
simulcasting of ATSC 1.0 service. Consumers will need to be informed if
stations they view will be changing channels and encouraged to rescan
their receivers for new channel assignments. Although we agree that
broadcasters will be motivated to inform viewers of the availability
and features of Next Gen TV and how to continue to receive their ATSC
1.0 signals during simulcasting, we conclude that consumer education
requirements are needed to ensure that broadcasters provide adequate
notice to viewers and to minimize any potential disruption to viewers.
83. All stations that relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g., moving
to a host station's facility, subsequently moving to a different host,
or returning to its original facility) must air daily on-air consumer
education PSAs or crawls,\109\ beginning 30 days prior to the date that
the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0 operations on their existing
facilities. Stations will have the option of choosing between PSAs and
crawls or may air a mix of PSAs and crawls. Stations will also have the
discretion to choose the timeslots in which their PSAs or crawls will
air. Crawls must be provided in the same language as a majority of the
programming carried by the station.\110\ Although we are not mandating
specific language, crawls must provide all pertinent information to
consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ A ``crawl'' is ``text that advances very slowly across the
bottom or top of the screen.'' Stations may use alternative forms of
crawls, including a text ``flipper,'' which is a message on the
screen that flips to a new line of text instead of crawling across
the screen.
\110\ The crawls should not block any closed captioning or
emergency information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
84. We conclude that this will ensure that viewers are apprised of
the potential impact of the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0 service on
them. PSAs must also be provided in the same language as a majority of
the programming carried by the station, provide all pertinent
information to consumers, and be closed captioned.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ We recognize that our rules exempt PSAs that are shorter
than 10 minutes in duration from the captioning requirements. Given
the importance of the information to be included in these PSAs,
however, we expressly require that these PSAs be closed captioned
regardless of their duration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
85. We will also require LPTV stations and any other stations that
transition directly to ATSC 3.0 to provide on-air notifications to
ensure that viewers are aware that they will no longer be able to
receive the signals of these stations in ATSC 1.0 and that they may
need to obtain new equipment to receive the ATSC 3.0 transmissions of
these stations. Stations that transition directly to ATSC 3.0 must
provide on-air notifications beginning 30 days prior to the date that
they terminate their ATSC 1.0 operations. Such crawls or PSAs must
provide all pertinent information to consumers. To the extent that such
equipment is available, we encourage stations to include in their on-
air notices and on their websites information about the availability of
external tuner dongles and gateway devices that can be used to upgrade
viewers' TV receivers to receive ATSC 3.0 transmissions. These stations
must otherwise comply with the same on-air notification requirements
set forth above for stations that relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals.
86. The Commission will support broadcasters' consumer education
efforts by, among other things, responding to consumer questions
regarding the deployment of Next Gen TV and ATSC 1.0 simulcasting and
providing consumer assistance on rescanning TVs. In addition, the
Commission will update its website (www.fcc.gov) to provide additional
information and guidance to consumers on Next Gen TV.
4. Ancillary and Supplementary Services
87. We decline to reexamine the fee that broadcasters must pay to
offer ancillary and supplemental services at this time, as requested by
several commenters. Broadcasters currently must remit an annual fee
equal to five percent of the gross revenues derived from any ancillary
or supplementary services for which viewers must pay a subscription
fee, or for which the broadcaster directly or indirectly receives
compensation from a third party in exchange for the transmission of
material provided by the third party (other than commercial
advertisements used to support broadcasting for which a fee is not
required). Under Section 336 of the Act, the Commission is required to
set the ancillary services fee so as to (1) recover for the public a
portion of the value of the public spectrum made available for
ancillary or supplemental use by broadcasters, (2) avoid unjust
enrichment of broadcasters, and (3) recover for the public an amount
that equals the amount that would have been recovered at auction. In
addition, the Commission must adjust the ancillary services fee
periodically to ensure that these requirements continue to be met. Some
commenters suggest that a higher fee may be warranted to ensure
compliance with the statutory directive, while others assert that the
fee should be reduced to ensure that it does not thwart innovation by
Next Gen TV broadcasters.
88. We conclude that it would be premature at this time to adjust
the fee associated with ancillary services. It is
[[Page 5015]]
not clear from the record which ATSC 3.0-based services and features
will be ``ancillary services'' within the meaning of our rules or which
such services will be feeable. Moreover, we note that compared to other
revenue sources, ancillary services today remain an insignificant
portion of total station revenue. Once Next Gen TV broadcasters have
implemented ancillary and supplementary services, the Commission will
be in a better position to assess whether adjustment of the ancillary
services fee is warranted and may revisit this issue.
5. Interplay With Post-Incentive Auction Transition/Repack
89. Authorizing the deployment of Next Gen TV on a voluntary basis
concurrently with the post-incentive auction transition is likely to
create efficiencies for repacked stations that want to upgrade to ATSC
3.0. In particular, commenters point out that the incremental cost of
adding Next Gen TV capability as part of a station's equipment
reconfiguration or upgrade during the repack process will be
significantly less than the cost of upgrading equipment twice, once for
the repack and once for the deployment of ATSC 3.0 service. We
reiterate that all requests for reimbursement from the TV Broadcaster
Relocation Fund (Reimbursement Fund), including those for ATSC 3.0
capable equipment, will be evaluated consistent with the standards set
forth in the Incentive Auction Report and Order. In that order, the
Commission recognized that replacement of equipment eligible for
reimbursement from the Reimbursement Fund ``necessarily may include
improved functionality,'' but stated ``[w]e do not . . . anticipate
providing reimbursement for new, optional features in equipment unless
the station or MVPD documents that the feature is already present in
the equipment that is being replaced. Eligible stations and MVPDs may
elect to purchase optional equipment capability or make other upgrades
at their own cost, but only the cost of the equipment without optional
upgrades is a reimbursable expense.'' Thus, for example, broadcasters
will be allowed to seek reimbursement for equipment that facilitates
ATSC 3.0 capability (such as higher transmitter power or horizontal/
elliptical antenna polarization), but any costs associated with the
ATSC 3.0 capability will not be reimbursable (i.e., broadcasters will
be responsible for the difference between the cost of the ATSC 3.0-
capable equipment and the equipment needed to broadcast using the ATSC
1.0 standard).\112\ We will also monitor the filing of license
applications filed by stations that seek to deploy ATSC 3.0 and the
Media Bureau may seek information it deems necessary from broadcasters
to ensure this voluntary transition does not negatively impact or delay
the mandatory post-incentive auction transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ NAB asserts that ``current generation equipment that will
be deployed during repacking is, in many cases, already Next Gen
compatible, or capable of being easily upgraded to be Next Gen-
compatible. To the extent there are any cost differences between
equipment that is Next Gen-compatible and equipment that is not, NAB
has stated that it is committed to assisting the FCC in ensuring
that repacking funds are not directed to unwarranted or unnecessary
upgrades.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Technical Issues
90. In this section, we resolve technical issues that the
authorization of ATSC 3.0 raises. First, we incorporate certain parts
of the ATSC 3.0 standard by reference into our rules. Next, we adopt
our proposal to calculate Next Gen TV interference to DTV signals using
the methodology and planning factors specified OET-69. Finally, we
conclude that broadcast television stations may operate ATSC 3.0 Single
Frequency Networks pursuant to our current rules that authorize
Distributed Transmission Systems.
1. Incorporation by Reference of Technical Standards
91. We incorporate two parts of the ATSC 3.0 ``physical layer''
standard into our rules: (1) ATSC A/321:2016 ``System Discovery &
Signaling'' (A/321), which is the standard used to communicate the RF
signal type that the ATSC 3.0 signal will use, and (2) A/322:2017
``Physical Layer Protocol'' (A/322), which is the standard that defines
the waveforms that ATSC 3.0 signals may take. With respect to A/322, we
apply the standard only to a Next Gen TV station's primary free over-
the-air video programming stream and incorporate it by reference into
our rules for a period of five years from the date of publication in
the Federal Register.\113\ We do not incorporate any other of the ATSC
3.0 standards; broadcasters are authorized, but not required, to use
any other elements of ATSC 3.0. The ATSC 3.0 standards are reasonably
available because they are available on the ATSC website at:
www.atsc.org/standards/atsc-3-0-standards/ and from ATSC at their
office: 1776 K Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ As we discuss below in paragraphs 100-101, this
requirement will sunset at the end of the five-year period unless
extended by the Commission via rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
92. The ATSC 3.0 suite of standards is split into multiple parts
under a unifying parent standard. The ATSC 3.0 standards are structured
into three layers: (1) The physical layer, (2) the management and
protocols layer, and (3) the applications and presentation layer. Each
of the standards fits into only one layer, making it possible to
develop and update each part independently. The physical layer includes
the definition of the radio frequency (RF) waveform used in ATSC 3.0,
as well as the coding and error correction that determine the
robustness of the signal to noise and interference. The management and
protocols layer organizes data bits into streams and files and
establishes the protocol for the receiver to direct those streams to
the proper destinations. The applications and presentation layer
includes audio and video compression technologies, captions and
descriptive audio, emergency alerts, parental controls, and interactive
applications. It also specifies how the station is displayed to
viewers.
93. A/321. We adopt our proposal to incorporate by reference and
make mandatory for Next Gen TV broadcasting the ATSC A/321 standard.
Commenters broadly support this action. As the entry point to the
physical layer of the ATSC 3.0 standards, A/321 defines a brief robust
``bootstrap'' signal followed by a window for data transmission that is
periodic and contains information to help Next Gen TV receivers quickly
locate and understand the RF formats of the data portions of the Next
Gen TV signal. The bootstrap signal can indicate that the remainder of
the signal is one of many different RF signal types.\114\ This gives
the broadcast industry the ability to later define additional signal
types while using a consistent bootstrap signal that can indicate to
Next Gen TV receivers that they can ignore portions of the signal that
are not compatible with that particular receiver. The bootstrap further
serves to split the overall signal into segments that can follow
different standards and/or use different robustness parameters. The
bootstrap signal also includes data that can wake a receiver from
standby mode to receive and display emergency information. By
incorporating and making mandatory the A/321 standard, we ensure that
the RF waveforms of the bootstrap portion of broadcasters' Next Gen TV
signals will be fully defined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\114\ At the time of this Order, only one such signal type is
standardized and mentioned within the record, and it is described by
ATSC A/322.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
94. A/322. We also incorporate by reference the ATSC A/322 standard
and require that broadcasters' primary free over-the-air Next Gen TV
video
[[Page 5016]]
programming stream adhere to the standard, for a period of five years
from the effective date of the rule incorporating this standard. In the
Next Gen TV NPRM, we sought comment on whether to incorporate this
component of the physical layer into our rules. Some commenters,
including CTA, urge us to incorporate A/322 to provide certainty to
television receiver manufacturers and consumers that their televisions
will be able to receive Next Gen TV signals. They suggest that A/322 is
necessary to complete the definition of the interference environment of
Next Gen TV as well as to protect consumers and other stakeholders from
purchasing equipment that is unable to receive over-the-air broadcasts.
Some broadcasters, however, claim that if we require them to adhere to
A/322, they will not be able to innovate and offer services other than
fixed television broadcasting. In an effort to balance our goals of
protecting consumers while promoting innovation, we conclude that
requiring Next Gen TV broadcasters to adhere to A/322 for an
appropriate transitional period, and only on their primary video
programming stream, appropriately addresses the concerns raised in the
record and will best serve the public interest.
95. Requiring Next Gen TV broadcasters to broadcast their primary
video programming stream in accordance with A/322 for a limited period
will benefit consumers and other stakeholders. As LG explains, device
manufacturers and MVPDs may not be able to reliably predict what signal
modulation a broadcaster is using unless broadcasters are required to
follow A/322. This uncertainty could cause manufacturers to
inadvertently build equipment that cannot receive Next Gen TV
broadcasts or could render MVPDs unable to receive and retransmit the
signals of Next Gen TV stations. These outcomes would harm consumers.
We note that although NAB was originally opposed to the Commission
adopting A/322, more recently it has acknowledged that ``adopting the
full physical layer of the Next Gen standard, including A/322'' may
``ensure that consumer electronics manufacturers can build television
receivers with confidence.'' One of the primary reasons we adopted the
ATSC 1.0 standard for DTV was ``to ensure that all affected parties
have sufficient confidence and certainty in order to promote the smooth
introduction of a free and universally available digital broadcast
television service.'' \115\ We similarly find here that adopting A/322,
with the limitations set forth herein, is necessary to ensure adequate
certainty with respect to the voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ The issues we address here are similar to those faced in
the Fourth DTV Report and Order. At that time, we based our decision
to adopt and incorporate the ATSC 1.0 standard upon four goals: (1)
To ensure that all affected parties have sufficient confidence and
certainty in order to promote the smooth introduction of a free and
universally available digital broadcast television service; (2) to
increase the availability of new products and services to consumers
through the introduction of digital broadcasting; (3) to ensure that
our rules encourage technological innovation and competition; and
(4) to minimize regulation and assure that any regulations we do
adopt remain in effect no longer than necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
96. We are persuaded, however, that it is not appropriate at this
time to require broadcasters to adhere to A/322 indefinitely. As the
record indicates, the ATSC 3.0 standard could evolve, and stagnant
Commission rules could prevent broadcasters from taking advantage of
that evolution. NAB proposes, with respect to the one free over-the-air
video programming stream that Next Gen TV broadcasters will be required
to provide, ``that broadcasters rely on both components of the physical
layer, that is, A/321 and A/322,'' and that the ``requirement to
incorporate A/322 sunset automatically after a period of three years
unless extended by the Commission following a rulemaking proceeding.''
We agree with the basic principle of NAB's proposal. In particular, we
agree that the Commission ``. . . can provide the certainty the
consumer electronics industry desires with the flexibility broadcasters
seek while minimizing regulatory burdens'' by incorporating A/322 into
our rules for a transitional period. After that transitional period,
the requirement will sunset if it is not reinstated by the Commission
via rulemaking before the end of the transitional period.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ We will also use this period to monitor how the
marketplace handles patent royalties for essential patents, but we
will not require reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) licensing
at this time. With no evidence of patent licensing issues, we
believe it is premature to impose regulations on the private
licensing marketplace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
97. We conclude that five years, rather than three years, is the
appropriate amount of time to require broadcasters to use the A/322
standard for their primary video programming stream. Three years, as
proposed by NAB, would sunset the requirement within (or only shortly
after) the incentive auction repacking period and likely before many
stations have had a reasonable opportunity to implement Next Gen TV
broadcasting. We find that a time and scope-limited adoption of A/322
strikes an appropriate balance of all interests reflected in the
record. Our approach will let broadcasters develop new ancillary
services outside the boundaries of A/322. It will also establish a
period of certainty for manufacturers, MVPDs, and consumers that will
prevent broadcasting standards from splintering and will speed the
overall adoption of ATSC 3.0. Requiring Next Gen TV broadcasters to use
A/322 only with respect to the primary video programming stream leaves
significant ability for broadcasters to innovate with regard to
ancillary services. Thus, we conclude that the requirement that
broadcasters adhere to the A/322 standard requirement will sunset five
years from its effective date (i.e., the date it is published in the
Federal Register), unless the Commission extends the requirement via
rulemaking.
98. We find that the benefits of requiring broadcasters' primary
video programming stream to adhere to A/322 outweigh the burdens,
particularly because A/322 gives broadcasters many choices. As
commenters explain, the A/322 standard enables a significant amount of
broadcaster flexibility, allowing broadcasters to choose from tens of
thousands of different robustness operating points. The parameters that
determine these operating points allow broadcasters to customize the
payload, interference susceptibility, and mobile performance of their
primary video signal, and allow broadcasters to design their signals to
support a range that extends all the way from very robust mobile video
to very high quality Ultra-High Definition and High Dynamic Range
video. In addition, we are not adopting at this time any of the other
ATSC 3.0 standards, so broadcasters that choose to deploy Next Gen TV
service will have considerable flexibility to innovate.
99. We disagree with suggestions, however, that incorporating A/322
into our rules is necessary to make interference calculations more
certain and predictable. LG and others assert that A/321 defines only a
small portion of the ATSC 3.0 RF waveform, but an engineering study
performed by MSW showed that the A/322 waveform is sufficiently noise-
like to be considered in the interference environment in the same the
way the DTV waveform is. So we expect that any coded orthogonal
frequency-division multiplexing signal likely to be used by
broadcasters,\117\ as accommodated by the A/321 bootstrap signal, will
be noise-like. We agree with
[[Page 5017]]
NAB's suggestion that ``. . . the Commission should seek to minimize
regulatory burdens by requiring only that any digital transmissions are
randomized and noise like and do not cause harmful interference by
staying within the constraints of Section 73.622(h) of the Commission's
rules.'' Therefore, ATSC 3.0 signals are prohibited from causing
harmful interference under 47 CFR 73.622(h) regardless of whether we
require broadcasters to adhere to A/322.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ Coded orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing, or
COFDM, is the scheme used to modulate ATSC 3.0 signals. It replaces
the 8-VSB modulation scheme upon which the ATSC 1.0 standard relies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
100. Although ONE Media argues that requiring broadcasters to
adhere to A/322 will limit the mobile reception performance of the ATSC
3.0 standard, the record suggests that this concern is overstated. LG
performed mobile reception tests pursuant to an ATSC 3.0 experimental
license, and the report resulting from those tests indicates that the
ATSC 3.0 standard, including A/322, allows for ``[h]ighly reliable in-
vehicle mobile reception.'' Although the Commission has limited data to
rely on at this time, it appears that the performance of the ATSC 3.0
standard will allow broadcasters to confidently implement mobile
services, even while they adhere to A/322. Moreover, because we require
broadcasters to adhere to A/322 only with respect to the primary video
programming stream that the Next Gen TV broadcaster transmits,
broadcasters will be able to innovate outside the bounds of A/322 with
the rest of the spectrum they are licensed to use.
2. Service and Interference Protections
101. In this section, we adopt the service and interference
protection rules that we proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM. In the NPRM,
we raised three potential interference issues with respect to the
adoption of the ATSC 3.0 transmission standard: (1) Interference caused
by ATSC 3.0 signals to ATSC 1.0 (DTV) signals, (2) interference caused
by DTV or ATSC 3.0 signals to other ATSC 3.0 signals, and (3)
interference-related concerns arising with respect to ATSC 3.0 signals
and non-television services that operate within or adjacent to the TV
band. We proposed to use the same technical parameters as we use for
DTV signals when evaluating interference caused by or from an ATSC 3.0
signal. We also proposed to update our rules to allow updated
population inputs when evaluating a broadcaster's application for a new
or modified facility.
a. Interference Protection of ATSC 1.0 (DTV) Signals
102. As we proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM, we will use our
existing methodology and planning factors to calculate how ATSC 3.0
signals will interfere with ATSC 1.0 signals. In the NPRM, we proposed
to apply the methodology and planning factors specified in OET Bulletin
No. 69 to calculate interference from ATSC 3.0 to DTV signals, and we
sought comment on whether DTV operations would be sufficiently
protected by the OET Bulletin No. 69 methodology and planning factors
when applied to interference predictions from ATSC 3.0 signals. The
Petition included laboratory measurements that suggested that RF
emission mask and effective radiated power limits for the ATSC 3.0
signal could remain unchanged from existing limits for DTV signals.
Based on those measurements, we proposed to calculate interference from
ATSC 3.0 signals in accordance with 47 CFR 73.622, 73.623 and 74.703
and as implemented by OET Bulletin No. 69. We solicited specific
measurement results in response to the Petitioners' claim that ATSC 3.0
and DTV signals should be considered equivalent in terms of potential
interference to DTV signals, but received no additional reports or
measurements to either support or refute the claim that ATSC 3.0
signals could be treated the same as DTV signals when considering
interference from ATSC 3.0 to DTV signals. However, all commenters who
addressed the issue supported our proposed approach, and no alternative
methodologies or planning factors were proposed. We accordingly adopt
the use of the methodology and planning factors specified in Sections
73.622, 73.624 and 74.703 of the Commission's rules and in OET Bulletin
No. 69 to calculate interference from ATSC 3.0 to DTV signals, and we
make no modifications to these rules or to the RF emission mask and
effective radiated power limits.
b. Service and Interference Protection of ATSC 3.0 Signals
103. We also adopt our proposals regarding service and interference
protection of ATSC 3.0 signals; we will use the same methodology and
planning factors defined for DTV when defining the service area of an
ATSC 3.0 signal and define the ATSC 3.0 interference criteria for co-
and adjacent channel interfering signals at the same levels as
specified in OET Bulletin No. 69 for DTV signals. The DTV transmission
standard has fixed transmission and error correction parameters and a
single associated minimum signal strength threshold (or signal-to-
noise-ratio/SNR threshold) for service. The minimum SNR threshold is
used as a basis for determining where a DTV broadcast television
station's signal can be received. Whether a DTV broadcast television
station is considered to have service and receive protection from
interference is determined in part by this threshold. The minimum
expected signal level for an ATSC 3.0 signal is much more dynamic. The
ATSC 3.0 standard enables broadcasters to choose from multiple
modulation and error correction parameters, which have the effect of
allowing them to adjust data rates and corresponding minimum SNR
thresholds. Further, ATSC 3.0 enables broadcasters to transmit multiple
program streams with different parameters simultaneously. This means
that, as a practical matter, the actual area where the signal of a
television station broadcasting an ATSC 3.0 signal can be received may
not necessarily match up to the same area defined by the single minimum
SNR threshold of DTV. The SNR threshold for the ATSC 3.0 transmission
standard will be variable and station-specific, enabling tradeoffs
depending on each station's programming offerings and quality of
service goals. In consideration of the dynamic nature of ATSC 3.0
transmission standard, our rules will maintain the status quo for
interference protection and allow us to calculate the coverage areas of
ATSC 3.0 stations with certainty. We discuss each aspect of Service and
Protection of ATSC 3.0 signals below.
(i) Preservation of Service
104. We require Next Gen TV broadcasters to offer at least one free
ATSC 3.0 video programming stream comparable to a DTV signal and to
provide a signal with a chosen modulation/coding scheme that requires a
SNR of no more than would be required of a DTV signal.\118\ This
requirement will preserve service to existing OTA viewers, all else
being equal (i.e., an ATSC 3.0 transmission from the same antenna,
location, and power level, received by equipment with the same
performance as a DTV transmission will cover the same area as a
comparable DTV signal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ OET Bulletin No. 69 defines service of a DTV signal as
those locations where the SNR is 15 or greater. This would be the
same threshold applied to the free ATSC 3.0 video programming stream
to achieve a ``DTV-equivalent'' service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
105. We adopt our proposal to mandate Next Gen TV broadcasters to
offer at least one free ATSC 3.0 video programming stream that requires
a SNR of no more than 15 dB (streams requiring a lower SNR would also
[[Page 5018]]
qualify).\119\ By adopting this requirement, we guarantee that any
station beginning ATSC 3.0 operation will continue to provide at least
one free video programming stream to viewers within the ATSC 1.0-
equivalent service area who choose to upgrade their receiver equipment
to the Next Gen TV standard. Generally, commenters support this
approach, but AT&T and ATVA suggest that the proposal ``does not go far
enough.'' We believe that mandating a lower threshold for ATSC 3.0
signals, as suggested by AT&T and ATVA, is unnecessary because a lower
threshold would potentially encompass a larger audience than an
equivalent DTV signal.\120\ At the same time, to the extent that
broadcasters want to offer a video programming stream in the manner
suggested by AT&T and ATVA, a signal with a 0 dB minimum SNR would
satisfy our requirement because 0 dB is less than the 15 dB service
threshold ceiling for minimum SNR being adopted here. Therefore, we
adopt a SNR that balances the need for OTA viewers throughout an ATSC
3.0 station's contour to receive television broadcast services when
stations choose to voluntarily transmit ATSC 3.0 signals with the
desire of broadcasters to flexibly offer various programming streams in
ATSC 3.0 in addition to the minimum single free program stream required
for DTV signals by 47 CFR 73.624.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\119\ The single free ATSC 3.0 video programming stream must
comply with the ATSC A/322 standard for a period of five years from
the date of publication in the Federal Register.
\120\ Additionally, if an HD video stream requires about 3 Mbps
with ATSC 3.0, then assuming the entire signal uses the 15 dB SNR
value and thus about 25 Mbps is available in total, then most of the
capacity of the signal would remain available, therefore making the
impact of this requirement minimal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Next Gen TV Service Area
106. We will use the methodology and planning factors defined in
OET Bulletin No. 69 to define an ATSC 3.0 ``DTV-equivalent'' service
area in which the ATSC 3.0 signal is protected from interference, as we
proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM. Historically, we have relied upon
this methodology and these planning factors to determine service for
DTV with satisfactory results, and many commenters support the
proposal. ONE Media is the only commenter that does not support the
proposal, suggesting that, ``except for cases in which other Commission
rules require reference to a service area (e.g., community of license
coverage), the Commission should abandon efforts to define service
areas and instead should provide broadcasters flexibility to deploy in
whatever manner the market demands.'' We elect not to adopt ONE Media's
proposal because such a significant shift would not align with the
Commission's current goal to minimize the potential impact to viewers
of stations that voluntarily choose to switch to ATSC 3.0.
(iii) Interference Protection
107. We will use a protection threshold for Next Gen TV signals
that would provide an equivalent level of protection as provided to a
DTV signal, as we proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM. Under this
approach, an ATSC 3.0 signal will be protected from co-channel and
adjacent channel interference as defined in OET Bulletin No. 69.\121\
Commenters generally support the proposal to use the OET-69 thresholds
to protect ATSC 3.0 signals from interference. TV White space
proponents generally oppose any protections that would allow
broadcasters to expand their service areas beyond the existing DTV
service area definition. NAB states that ``the Commission need not
consider modifications to the methodology or planning factors in OET-
69.'' One Ministries requests that we ``relax the adjacent channel D/U
ratio for all receivers (not just ATSC 3.0 receivers) to be 33 dB or
higher,'' but no other commenters discuss this issue. Public Interest
Groups support maintaining the existing interference protections and
oppose any expansion of the service area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\121\ The threshold levels at which interference is considered
to occur are: (i) For co-channel stations, the D/U ratio is + 15 dB.
This value is only valid at locations where the signal-to-noise
ratio is 28 dB or greater. At the edge of the noise-limited service
area, where the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio is 16 dB, this value is
+ 23 dB. At locations where the S/N ratio is greater than 16 dB but
less than 28 dB, D/U values are computed from the following formula:
D/U = 15 + 10log10[1.0/(1.0-10-x/10)] Where x = S/N-15.19 (minimum
signal to noise ratio) (ii) For interference from a lower first-
adjacent channel, the D/U ratio is -28 dB. (iii) For interference
from an upper first-adjacent channel, the D/U ratio is -26 dB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
108. We have not been given sufficient information to conclude, nor
do we have any reason to believe, that ATSC 3.0 receivers will perform
any differently than DTV receivers perform today. In addition, as
discussed above, the measurement tests provided by the Petitioners,
while performed on DTV receivers, demonstrate that the adjacent channel
emissions of ATSC 3.0 signals are equivalent, and therefore are not
expected to reduce the sensitivity of ATSC 3.0 receivers. Adopting the
same interference protection requirements as we have today will provide
regulatory certainty while broadcasters voluntarily deploy ATSC 3.0.
Nevertheless, if we receive additional information or conduct our own
receiver tests, we may revisit whether either the co-channel or
adjacent channel interference protection criteria for ATSC 3.0 should
be any different from the interference protections provided for DTV in
OET Bulletin No. 69.
c. Interference Protection Affecting Other Services
109. We do not revise our current interference-related rules with
respect to the other services in the TV band or adjacent bands. In the
Next Gen TV NPRM, we sought comment on whether there would be any
interference-related issues that arise with respect to services and
operations in the TV Band other than those of full-power, Class A, LPTV
and TV translator stations, as well as whether there could be any such
issues in other adjacent bands. The record reflects that as long as the
emission mask, power limits, and the methodology and protection
criteria in OET Bulletin No. 69 are maintained, no rule changes are
necessary to protect full-power, Class A, LPTV and TV translator
services. National Public Radio (NPR) raised concerns about potential
interference between ATSC 3.0 transmissions on TV channel 6 and FM band
operations. But as the Petitioners explain, the ATSC 3.0 emission mask
will remain unchanged,\122\ and therefore we see no need to require
additional protections for TV channel 6 adjacent to the FM broadcast
service. We also reject the Wi-Fi Alliance's requests to protect only
the primary video programming stream of ATSC 3.0 signals and avoid
requirements to protect single frequency networks (SFNs). White space
devices (WSDs) must protect the television service, as defined by
current rules, regardless of how many streams are being offered or
which stream is primary, just as WSDs are required to protect the
multiple DTV programming streams that many television stations offer
today. In addition, to the extent that a DTV station makes a request
today to deploy a distributed transmission system (DTS) or SFN, WSDs
must continue to protect those licensed service areas. No comments were
filed with respect to potential interference-related issues pertaining
to LPAS or unlicensed wireless microphones operating in the TV bands,
or with respect to WMTS or RAS
[[Page 5019]]
services in the adjacent band, and therefore, as proposed, we do not
adopt any changes to those rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ Specifically, the report indicates that RF emission mask
characteristics will remain unchanged for Next Gen TV, that
effective radiated power limits for stations may be retained to
maintain protections for co-channel and adjacent channel
interference, and that its modulation characteristics are inherently
noise-like.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Station Interference Protection Population Inputs
110. We adopt the rule change we proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM
to evaluate interference that will result from applications for new or
modified facilities using the latest official U.S. Census figures.\123\
The Commission has calculated the degree of permissible interference to
populations served based on the 2000 U.S. Census population data with
one exception: For purposes of the incentive auction and repacking
process, the Commission uses 2010 U.S. Census population data for
interference calculations. We conclude that it is most reasonable to
rely on the most up-to-date U.S. Census information for these
calculations, an approach that the D.C. Circuit upheld in its decision
to allow the Commission to apply 2010 U.S. census population during the
incentive auction. We update our rules to permit the Media Bureau to
use the most recent U.S. Census statistics. We direct the Media Bureau
to announce when updated U.S. Census statistics have been incorporated
into our licensing systems and the date upon which such updated inputs
will be applied at least 60 days before they are used for application
processing purposes. Thus, after the repacking process is complete, any
broadcast television service or interference calculations will be based
on 2010 U.S. Census statistics, until after 2020, when the next U.S.
Census statistics are scheduled to become available and the Media
Bureau subsequently announces the date of application of such data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ The Bureau will incorporate the statistics as they become
available and it is able to incorporate the statistics into the
Commission's licensing processing systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Next Gen TV Single Frequency Networks (SFNs)
111. As proposed in the Next Gen TV NPRM, we conclude that
broadcast television stations may operate ATSC 3.0 Single Frequency
Networks (SFNs) pursuant to our current rules authorizing Distributed
Transmission Systems (DTS). Commenters support the authorization of
SFNs for Next Gen TV broadcasters, and emphasize the importance of such
networks to the successful deployment of ATSC 3.0 broadcasting. We also
adopt our proposal to require that all transmitters under a single DTS
license follow the same broadcast television transmission standard.
Finally, as proposed, we decline to adopt a synchronization standard
specific to ATSC 3.0.
112. As explained in the Next Gen TV NPRM, broadcasters
traditionally have used a single transmission site, and have provided
fill-in service using separately licensed secondary transmission sites
that typically use different RF channels. However, a broadcaster using
a DTS provides television service to its area by two or more
transmission sites using an identical signal on the same RF channel,
synchronized to manage self-interference.\124\ The rules established in
the DTS Report and Order describe the authorized service area, maximum
service area, station reference point, coverage determination,
protection from interference, and application requirements for DTS
stations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ Radio waves require a certain amount of time to travel any
given distance. In the case of a DTS network, this means that a
location in the service area of the station will most likely receive
the signals from the different transmitters at different times,
because the transmitters are different distances away from that
location. TV receivers are typically designed to handle a certain
range of time differences to accommodate signal reflections. If a
received DTS time difference falls outside that range, to the
receiver the signals appear to be co-channel interference. Because
the timing difference is predictable based on distance, precise
synchronization of the signals from the different transmitters
allows a station to offset the broadcast times with high precision,
so that the areas where large timing differences occur can be
redirected to low-impact regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
113. Commenters claim that broadcasters that deploy ATSC 3.0 will
have the ability to efficiently form SFNs, which for the purposes of
broadcast television is a term that is synonymous with DTS. No
commenters oppose the idea that broadcasters that opt to deploy ATSC
3.0 should be able to use SFNs. MWG points out that ATSC 3.0 ``uses a
form of modulation that is designed to support SFNs in DTS-style
operations,'' and that ``. . . with ATSC 3.0, signals from several
transmitters can be allowed to overlap, and the overlap can be
compensated. Indeed, the overlap can help to improve reception.'' The
record thus suggests that providing broadcasters with the ability to
use SFNs has the potential to make Next Gen TV services more robust.
114. We adopt our tentative conclusion in the Next Gen TV NPRM that
the rules the Commission already has established to authorize a DTS
station generally are adequate to authorize an ATSC 3.0 SFN station.
Several commenters request that we amend the service area rules
applicable to DTS to enable Next Gen TV stations to expand the area
that an ATSC 3.0 SFN license could cover. Other commenters oppose
changes to the current service area rules without further public
comment. The record generally does not address the technical
complexities that could be raised if we adopt this proposal or the
effect that changes to authorized DTS service areas could have on any
of our other rules that depend on station service areas. While we
recognize that the changes suggested by commenters could potentially
facilitate Next Gen TV deployment, no commenters state that the
proposed changes are necessary for broadcasters to begin using SFNs
with the ATSC 3.0 standard. As such, we find that the record does not
support changes to the authorized service areas for Next Gen TV SFNs,
and we decline to make any such changes at this time. The Commission
will monitor the deployment of ATSC 3.0 in the marketplace and will
reconsider this issue in the future if appropriate.\125\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ We note that stations that are interested in pursuing a
change to their DTS service area may file for waiver of our DTS
rules pursuant to our general waiver standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
115. We also adopt our tentative conclusion that there is no need
to implement a specific synchronization standard for ATSC 3.0 SFNs. In
the DTS Report and Order, the Commission found that it was not
necessary for a DTS station to use a specific synchronization system as
long as (1) the synchronization used by a station is effective in
minimizing interference within the system, (2) the station otherwise
provides service to the population within its service area consistent
with Commission rules, and (3) the station complies with the technical
standard adopted by the Commission. Thus, although ATSC had developed
the A/110 ``ATSC Standard for Transmitter Synchronization,'' the
Commission determined that it was not necessary to incorporate this
standard into our rules and that DTS stations should have flexibility
with regard to transmitter synchronization. We agree with commenters
that we should take the same approach for ATSC 3.0 SFNs, and note that
no commenters contested our proposal to adopt this approach. As MWG
explains, ``there are many ways in which such synchronization can be
obtained, and while the ATSC has developed an approach to transmitter
synchronization that is being standardized to facilitate interoperation
of equipment obtained from different manufacturers, there is no reason
for the Commission to constrain the choices that a broadcaster can
make.'' \126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ We also note that the A/322 standard, which we incorporate
into our rules, does not include a synchronization standard, nor
does it implicate any specific synchronization standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5020]]
116. Finally, we adopt our proposed rule to require all DTS
transmitters under the same license to follow the same digital
television broadcasting transmission standard. No one commented on this
proposal. This simple measure is meant to ensure that stations do not
attempt to mix ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 transmissions within a DTS
network. Doing so would introduce significant self-interference within
the station's service area and would be harmful to consumers.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Final Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
117. This document contains new information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).\127\ The
requirements will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general
public, and other Federal agencies will be invited to comment on the
information collection requirements contained in this proceeding. The
Commission will publish a separate document in the Federal Register at
a later date seeking these comments. In addition, we note that pursuant
to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002 (SBPRA),\128\ we
previously sought specific comment on how the Commission might further
reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns
with fewer than 25 employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified in Chapter 35 of title 44
U.S.C.).
\128\ The Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002 (SBPRA),
Public Law 107-198, 116 Stat. 729 (2002) (codified in Chapter 35 of
title 44 U.S.C.). See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Congressional Review Act
118. The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order in a
report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office,
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.\129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
119. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding.
The Federal Communications Commission (Commission) sought written
public comment on the proposals in the NPRM, including comment on the
IRFA. The Commission received one comment on the IRFA, while some other
commenters discussed the effect of the proposals on smaller entities,
as discussed below. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
120. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order. In summary,
we authorize television broadcasters to use the ``Next Generation''
broadcast television (Next Gen TV) transmission standard, also called
``ATSC 3.0'' or ``3.0,'' on a voluntary, market-driven basis. This
authorization is subject to broadcasters continuing to deliver current-
generation digital television (DTV) service, using the ATSC 1.0
transmission standard, also called ``ATSC 1.0'' or ``1.0,'' to their
viewers. The Report and Order adopts rules that will afford
broadcasters flexibility to deploy Next Gen TV service, while
minimizing the impact on, and costs to, consumers and other industry
stakeholders.
121. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in
Response to the IRFA. NTCA was the only party to file comments in
direct response to the IRFA. NTCA's comments focused on two key burdens
it says will be imposed on its members and other small MVPDs as a
result of broadcasters' voluntary deployment of ATSC 3.0 service.
First, NTCA contends that small MVPDs will bear the significant costs
associated with 3.0 carriage (even if carriage of 3.0 signals is not
mandatory) because broadcasters will be able to use their market power
to compel small MVPDs to carry 3.0 signals through the retransmission
consent process. To address this issue, NTCA requests that we prohibit
carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals via retransmission consent. Second, NTCA
contends that small MVPDs will bear costs associated with carriage of
1.0 simulcast signals which are moved to a host station's facility.
Finally, NTCA argues that the IRFA is ``deficient'' because ``it
provides no estimates of expenses or burdens that small MVPDs may
encounter as a result of ATSC 1.0 simulcasting.''
122. The R&O responds to these arguments proffered by NTCA and
other small MVPDs. First, the R&O makes clear that MVPDs are under no
statutory or regulatory obligation to carry any 3.0 signals.\130\
Because MVPDs are not obligated by rule or law to carry ATSC 3.0
signals, any costs to MVPDs of 3.0 carriage are voluntary. Thus, the
rules adopted do not impose direct costs on MVPDs. In addition, the R&O
concludes that it is premature to address any issues that may arise
with respect to the voluntary carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals before
broadcasters begin transmitting in ATSC 3.0.\131\ Therefore, the R&O
declines to adopt any new rules regarding retransmission consent in
this proceeding and will allow these issues at the outset to be
addressed through marketplace negotiations. Second, the R&O observes
that, under the existing must-carry rules, broadcasters are required to
bear the costs of delivering a good quality 1.0 signal to MVPDs. This
remains true for stations relocating their 1.0 simulcast channel to a
host facility. The existing rules, however, do not apply to the costs
on MVPDs of receiving and redistributing the signal to their
subscribers and so MVPDs generally assume these costs. Such costs are
generally viewed as the costs of doing business as MVPDs. The R&O does
not change this understanding. The R&O finds that the costs incurred
due to local simulcasting will occur on a market-driven basis and are
properly borne by the MVPDs. Finally, we disagree with NTCA's claim
that the IRFA was deficient, but respond to this claim in Section F. of
this FRFA because it relates to the sufficiency of the alternatives
considered to minimize costs and burdens on small MVPDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ The Report and Order also reminds parties of the statutory
requirement that they negotiate in good faith.
\131\ We note that no data is available to quantify the costs
associated with ATSC 3.0 carriage. See ATVA Comments at 10 (``Unlike
the costs associated with ATSC 1.0 simulcasts, MVPDs cannot yet
quantify the costs associated with ATSC 3.0 carriage. Much of the
necessary equipment does not yet exist.''). Although ATVA speculates
that ``broadcasters will insist on ATSC 3.0 carriage once the
Commission adopts ATSC 3.0 rules,'' ATVA representatives explain
that to date, they have generally been able to reach agreements that
delayed immediate carriage of ATSC 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
123. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration. The Chief Counsel did not file any
comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
124. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply. The types of small entities that
may be affected by the R&O fall within the following categories: (1)
Wired Telecommunications Carriers; Cable Companies and Systems (Rate
Regulation); (2) Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard); (3)
Direct Broadcast Satellite Service; (4) Satellite Master Antenna
Television (SMATV) Systems, also known as Private Cable Operators
(PCOs); (5) Home Satellite Dish (HSD) Service, (6) Open Video Services;
(7) Wireless Cable Systems--Broadband Radio Service and
[[Page 5021]]
Educational Broadband Service; (8) Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers
(ILECs) and Small Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers; Radio and
Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment
Manufacturing; (9) Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing; (10) and
Television Broadcasting.
125. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements. Because the deployment of ATSC 3.0 service by
Next Gen TV stations is purely voluntary, the rules related to the
provision of 3.0 service apply only to stations who choose to
participate. That is, there are no new mandatory reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements for stations that
choose not to participate. For broadcasters that choose to deploy ATSC
3.0 service, there are reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements. Stations that elect to broadcast using the Next Gen TV
standard must (1) provide one free, over-the-air video stream broadcast
in ATSC 3.0; (2) air a local simulcast of the primary video programming
stream of their ATSC 3.0 channel in ATSC 1.0 format; must file an
application to modify its license with the Commission, and receive
prior Commission approval, before: (a) Moving its 1.0 signal to a
temporary simulcast host station or moving its 1.0 simulcast to a
different host station; (b) commencing the airing of a 3.0 channel on a
3.0 host station (that has already converted to 3.0 operation) or
moving its 3.0 channel to a different host station; or (c) converting
its existing station to 3.0 technology or from 3.0 back to 1.0; and (4)
file the appropriate schedule(s) to FCC Form 2100 and must provide a
copy of the local simulcasting agreement to the Commission upon
request.
126. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered. The Commission
considered but declined to adopt certain alternatives suggested by
MVPDs to (1) negotiate for carriage of 3.0 signals separately from
carriage of 1.0 signals; (2) nullify existing contractual clauses that
would require MVPDs to carry 3.0 signals; (3) in the event of a good
faith complaint, subpoena negotiation-related documents under a
protective order to overcome any non-disclosure provisions; (4)
prohibit carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals via retransmission consent.
127. The R&O declines to adopt a Next Gen TV (ATSC 3.0) tuner
mandate. In deciding to rely on market forces in lieu of the
alternative of a tuner mandate, the Order lessens potential burdens
that equipment manufacturers, including small entities, otherwise might
face. When making this determination, the Commission considered
arguments raised by parties like ATBA who supported the alternative of
a tuner mandate for all television receivers, including smartphones and
other mobile devices, but ultimately agreed with those commenters who
argued consumer demand will drive the inclusion of ATSC 3.0 tuners in
television receivers.
128. Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of this
R&O in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
129. It is ordered, pursuant to the authority found in Sections 1,
4, 7, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), 336, 338, 399b, 403,
614, and 615 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.
151, 154, 157, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), 336, 338,
399b, 403, 534, and 535, this Report and Order is hereby adopted,
effective thirty (30) days after the date of publication in the Federal
Register.
130. It is further ordered that the Commission's rules are hereby
amended as set forth in Appendix B and will become effective 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register, except for 47 CFR 73.3801,
73.6029, and 74.782 which contain new or modified information
collection requirements that require approval by the OMB under the PRA
and which shall become effective after the Commission publishes a
notice in the Federal Register announcing OMB approval and the
effective date of the rules.
131. It is further ordered that, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 155(c), the
Chief, Media Bureau, is granted delegated authority for the narrow
purpose of amending FCC Form 2100 as necessary to implement the
licensing process adopted herein.
132. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment, Computer technology.
47 CFR Part 73
Communications equipment, Incorporation by reference, Television.
47 CFR Part 74
Communications equipment, Television.
47 CFR Part 76
Cable television.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR parts 15, 73, 74, and 76 as set forth below:
PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 336, 544a, and
549.
0
2. Amend Sec. 15.117 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 15.117 TV broadcast receivers.
* * * * *
(b) TV broadcast receivers shall be capable of adequately receiving
all channels allocated by the Commission to the television broadcast
service that broadcast digital signals using the DTV transmission
standard in Sec. 73.682(d) of this chapter, but need not be capable of
receiving analog signals or signals using the Next Gen TV transmission
standard in Sec. 73.682(f) of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
0
3. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 309, 310, 334, 336, and 339.
0
4. Amend Sec. 73.616 by revising paragraph (e)(1) introductory text
and adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.616 Post-transition DTV station interference protection.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) For evaluating compliance with the requirements of this
paragraph, interference to populations served is to be predicted based
on the most recent official decennial U.S. Census population data as
identified by the Media Bureau in a Public Notice issued not less than
60 days prior to use of the data for a specific year in application
processing, and otherwise according to the procedure set forth in OET
Bulletin No. 69: ``Longley-Rice Methodology for Evaluating TV Coverage
and
[[Page 5022]]
Interference'' (February 6, 2004) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
73.8000), including population served within service areas determined
in accordance with Sec. 73.622(e), consideration of whether F(50,10)
undesired signals will exceed the following desired-to-undesired (D/U)
signal ratios, assumed use of a directional receiving antenna, and use
of the terrain dependent Longley-Rice point-to-point propagation model.
Applicants may request the use of a cell size other than the default of
2.0 km per side, but only requests for cell sizes of 1.0 km per side or
0.5 km per side will be considered. The threshold levels at which
interference is considered to occur are:
* * * * *
(g) The interference protection requirements contained in this
section apply to television station operations under both the DTV
transmission standard in Sec. 73.682(d) and the Next Gen TV
transmission standard in Sec. 73.682(f).
0
5. Amend Sec. 73.624 by adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.624 Digital television broadcast stations.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) DTV licensees or permittees that choose to broadcast an ATSC
3.0 signal (using the Next Gen TV transmission standard in Sec.
73.682(f)) shall transmit at least one free over the air video
programming stream on that signal that requires at most the signal
threshold of a comparable received DTV signal. DTV licensees or
permittees that choose to broadcast an ATSC 3.0 signal (using the Next
Gen TV transmission standard in Sec. 73.682(f)) shall also simulcast
the primary video programming stream on its ATSC 3.0 signal by
broadcasting an ATSC 1.0 signal (using the DTV transmission standard in
Sec. 73.682(d)) from another broadcast television facility within its
local market in accordance with the local simulcasting requirement in
Sec. Sec. 73.3801, 73.6029 and 74.782 of this chapter.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 73.626 by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.626 DTV distributed transmission systems.
* * * * *
(g) All transmitters operating under a single DTS license must
follow the same digital broadcast television transmission standard.
0
7. Amend Sec. 73.682 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.682 TV transmission standards.
* * * * *
(f) Next Gen TV broadcast television transmission standard
authorized. (1) As an alternative to broadcasting only an ATSC 1.0
signal using the DTV transmission standard set forth in paragraph (d)
of this section, DTV licensees or permittees may choose to broadcast an
ATSC 3.0 signal using the Next Gen TV transmission standard set forth
in this paragraph (f), provided it also broadcasts a simulcast signal
in ATSC 1.0 (using the DTV transmission standard in Sec. 73.682(d)).
(2) Effective March 5, 2018, transmission of Next Gen TV broadcast
television (ATSC 3.0) signals shall comply with the standards for such
transmissions set forth in ATSC A/321:2016, ``System Discovery and
Signaling'' (March 23, 2016) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
73.8000). To the extent that virtual channels (specified in the DTV
transmission standard referenced in ATSC A/65C:2006 in paragraph (d) of
this section) are used in the transmission of Next Gen TV broadcasting,
major channel numbers shall be assigned as required by ATSC A/65C:2006
Annex B (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 73.8000). In addition,
until February 2, 2023, such signals shall also comply with the
standards set forth in ATSC A/322:2017 ``Physical Layer Protocol''
(June 6, 2017) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 73.8000) with
respect to the transmission of at least one free over the air primary
video programming stream.
0
8. Add Sec. 73.3801 to subpart H to read as follows:
Sec. 73.3801 Full power television simulcasting during the ATSC 3.0
(Next Gen TV) transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. For purposes of compliance with the
simulcasting requirement in paragraph (b) of this section, a full power
television station may partner with one or more other full power
stations or with one or more Class A, LPTV, or TV translator stations
in a simulcasting arrangement for purposes of airing either an ATSC 1.0
or ATSC 3.0 signal on a host station's (i.e., a station whose
facilities are being used to transmit programming originated by another
station) facilities. Noncommercial educational television stations may
participate in simulcasting arrangements with commercial stations.
(1) A full power television station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a Class A host station must comply with the
rules governing power levels and interference applicable to Class A
stations, and must comply in all other respects with the rules and
policies applicable to full power television stations set forth in this
part.
(2) A full power television station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a low power television or TV translator
host station must comply with the rules of part 74 of this chapter
governing power levels and interference applicable to low power
television or TV translator stations, and must comply in all other
respects with the rules and policies applicable to full power
television stations set forth in this part.
(3) A full power noncommercial educational television (NCE) station
airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities of a commercial
television host station must comply with the rules applicable to NCE
licensees.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. A full power television station that
chooses to air an ATSC 3.0 signal must simulcast the primary video
programming stream of that signal in an ATSC 1.0 format. This
requirement does not apply to any multicast streams aired on the ATSC
3.0 channel.
(1) The programming aired on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
``substantially similar'' to that aired on the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of this section, ``substantially
similar'' means that the programming must be the same except for
advertisements, promotions for upcoming programs, and programming
features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0. These
enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geo-targeted weather, targeted
emergency alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ``wake up'' ability and interactive
program features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g.,
4K or HDR); and
(iv) Personalization of programming performed by the viewer and at
the viewer's discretion. (2) For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, programming that airs at a different time on the ATSC 1.0
simulcast signal than on the primary video programming stream of the
ATSC 3.0 signal is not considered ``substantially similar.''
(c) Coverage requirements for the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal. For
full power broadcasters that elect temporarily to relocate their ATSC
1.0 signal to the facilities of a host station for purposes of
deploying ATSC 3.0
[[Page 5023]]
service (and that convert their existing facilities to ATSC 3.0), the
ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must continue to cover the station's entire
community of license (i.e., the station must choose a host from whose
transmitter site the Next Gen TV station will continue to meet the
community of license signal requirement over its current community of
license, as required by Sec. 73.625) and the host station must be
assigned to the same Designated Market Area (DMA) as the originating
station (i.e., the station whose programming is being transmitted on
the host station).
(d) Coverage requirements for ATSC 3.0 signals. For full power
broadcasters that elect to continue broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 on the
station's existing facilities and transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station, the ATSC 3.0 signal must be established
on a host station assigned to the same DMA as the originating station.
(e) Simulcasting agreements. (1) Simulcasting agreements must
contain provisions outlining each licensee's rights and
responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station's transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within the host station's channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair, and modification of
facilities, including a list of all relevant equipment, a description
of each party's financial obligations, and any relevant notice
provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the simulcast agreement may be
terminated, assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest station's (i.e., a station originating programming
that is being transmitted using the facilities of another station)
signal may be transitioned off the host station.
(2) Broadcasters must maintain a written copy of any simulcasting
agreement and provide it to the Commission upon request.
(f) Licensing of simulcasting stations and stations converting to
ATSC 3.0 operation. (1) Each station participating in a simulcasting
arrangement pursuant to this section shall continue to be licensed and
operated separately, have its own call sign, and be separately subject
to all applicable Commission obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC 1.0
and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the originating station's license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being aired on the
facilities of a host station. The Commission will also include a note
on a host station's license identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 guest
signal(s) being aired on the facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. A full power broadcaster must file an
application (FCC Form 2100) with the Commission, and receive Commission
approval, before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the facilities of a host station,
moving that signal from the facilities of an existing host station to
the facilities of a different host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities
of a host station (that has already converted to ATSC 3.0 operation),
moving its ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a different host
station, or discontinuing an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal or converting the station from ATSC 3.0 back to ATSC 1.0
transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect to any application in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section, a full power broadcaster may file
only an application for modification of license, provided no other
changes are being requested in such application that would require the
filing of an application for a construction permit as otherwise
required by the rules (see, e.g., Sec. 73.1690).
(4) Host station. A host station must first make any necessary
changes to its facilities before a guest station may file an
application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An application filed in accordance with
the streamlined process in paragraph (f)(3) of this section will
receive expedited processing provided, for stations requesting to air
an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a host station, the station
will provide ATSC 1.0 service to at least 95 percent of the predicted
population within the noise limited service contour of its original
ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An application in paragraph (f)(2) of
this section must include the following information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating broadcaster's facility and the DMA
of the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed necessary by the Commission to
process the application.
(ii) If an application in paragraph (f)(2) of this section includes
a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a host
station, the broadcaster must, in addition to the information in
paragraph (f)(6)(i), also indicate on the application:
(A) The predicted population within the noise limited service
contour served by the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal;
(B) The predicted population within the noise limited service
contour served by the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal that will lose
the station's ATSC 1.0 service as a result of the simulcasting
arrangement, including identifying areas of service loss by providing a
contour overlap map; and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal aired on the host station
will serve at least 95 percent of the population in paragraph
(f)(6)(ii)(A) of this section.
(iii)(A) If an application in paragraph (f)(2) of this section
includes a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station and does not meet the 95 percent standard in paragraph
(f)(6)(ii) of this section, the application must contain, in addition
to the information in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section,
the following information:
(1) Whether there is another possible host station(s) in the market
that would result in less service loss to existing viewers and, if so,
why the Next Gen TV broadcaster chose to partner with a host station
creating a larger service loss;
(2) What steps, if any, the station plans to take to minimize the
impact of the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC 3.0 dongles, set-top
boxes, or gateway devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(3) The public interest benefits of the simulcasting arrangement
and a showing of why the benefit(s) of granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s).
(B) These applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
(g) Consumer education for Next Gen TV stations. (1) Commercial and
noncommercial educational stations that relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals
(e.g., moving to a host station's facility, subsequently moving to a
different host, or returning to its original facility) are required to
air daily Public Service Announcements (PSAs) or crawls every day for
30 days prior to the date that the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0
operations on their existing facilities. Stations that transition
directly to ATSC 3.0 will be required to air daily PSAs or crawls every
day for 30 days prior to the date that the stations will terminate ATSC
1.0 operations.
[[Page 5024]]
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station and be
closed-captioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 signals or transitioning directly to ATSC 3.0, each PSA or crawl
must provide all pertinent information to consumers.
(h) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a temporary host station's facilities,
subsequently moving to a different host, or returning to its original
facility) must provide notice to MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry the station's ATSC 1.0
signal due to the relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be obligated to carry the station's
ATSC 1.0 signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section must contain the following
information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0 channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna position, location, or power
levels;
(iv) Stream identification information; and
(v) Engineering staff contact information.
(3) If any of the information in paragraph (h)(2) of this section
changes, an amended notification must be sent.
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals if the relocation occurs during the post-incentive auction
transition period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals if the relocation occurs after the post-incentive auction
transition period (see 47 CFR 27.4).
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC 1.0 signal relocation
changes, the station must send a further notice to affected MVPDs
informing them of the new anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose whether to provide notice as
required by this section either by a letter notification or
electronically via email if the relevant MVPD agrees to receive such
notices by email. Letter notifications to MVPDs must be sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested to the MVPD's address in the
FCC's Online Public Inspection File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have an online file, notices must
be sent to the cable system's official address of record provided in
the system's most recent filing in the FCC's Cable Operations and
Licensing System (COALS). For MVPDs with no official address in OPIF or
COALS, the letter must be sent to the MVPD's official corporate address
registered with their State of incorporation.
0
9. Add Sec. 73.6029 to subpart J to read as follows:
Sec. 73.6029 Class A television simulcasting during the ATSC 3.0
(Next Gen TV) transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. For purposes of compliance with the
simulcasting requirement in paragraph (b) of this section, a Class A
television station may partner with one or more other Class A stations
or with one or more full power, LPTV, or TV translator stations in a
simulcasting arrangement for purposes of airing either an ATSC 1.0 or
ATSC 3.0 signal on a host station's (i.e., a station whose facilities
are being used to transmit programming originated by another station)
facilities.
(1) A Class A television station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a full power host station must comply with
the rules of Part 73 of this chapter governing power levels and
interference, and must comply in all other respects with the rules and
policies applicable to Class A television stations, as set forth in
this subpart.
(2) A Class A television station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a low power television or TV translator
host station must comply with the rules of part 74 of this chapter
governing power levels and interference that are applicable to low
power television or TV translator stations, and must comply in all
other respects with the rules and policies applicable to Class A
television stations, as set forth in this subpart.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. A Class A television station that
chooses to air an ATSC 3.0 signal must simulcast the primary video
programming stream of that signal in an ATSC 1.0 format. This
requirement does not apply to any multicast streams aired on the ATSC
3.0 channel.
(1) The programming aired on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
``substantially similar'' to that aired on the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of this section, ``substantially
similar'' means that the programming must be the same except for
advertisements, promotions for upcoming programs, and programming
features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0. These
enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geo-targeted weather, targeted
emergency alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ``wake up'' ability and interactive
program features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g.,
4K or HDR); and
(iv) Personalization of programming performed by the viewer and at
the viewer's discretion.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, programming
that airs at a different time on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal than on
the primary video programming stream of the ATSC 3.0 signal is not
considered ``substantially similar.''
(c) Coverage requirements for the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal. For
Class A broadcasters that elect temporarily to relocate their ATSC 1.0
signal to the facilities of a host station for purposes of deploying
ATSC 3.0 service (and that convert their existing facilities to ATSC
3.0), the station:
(1) Must maintain overlap between the protected contour (Sec.
73.6010(c)) of its existing signal and its ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal;
(2) May not relocate its ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal more than 30
miles from the reference coordinates of the relocating station's
existing antenna location; and
(3) Must select a host station assigned to the same DMA as the
originating station (i.e., the station whose programming is being
transmitted on the host station).
(d) Coverage requirements for ATSC 3.0 signals. For Class A
broadcasters that elect to continue broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 from the
station's existing facilities and transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal on the
facilities of a host station, the ATSC 3.0 signal must be established
on a host station assigned to the same DMA as the originating station.
(e) Simulcasting agreements. (1) Simulcasting agreements must
contain provisions outlining each licensee's rights and
responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station's transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within the host station's channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair, and modification of
facilities, including a list of all relevant equipment, a description
of each party's financial
[[Page 5025]]
obligations, and any relevant notice provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the simulcast agreement may be
terminated, assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest station's (i.e., a station originating programming
that is being transmitted using the facilities of a host station)
signal may be transitioned off the host station.
(2) Broadcasters must maintain a written copy of any simulcasting
agreement and provide it to the Commission upon request.
(f) Licensing of simulcasting stations and stations converting to
ATSC 3.0 operation. (1) Each station participating in a simulcasting
arrangement pursuant to this section shall continue to be licensed and
operated separately, have its own call sign, and be separately subject
to all applicable Commission obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC 1.0
and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the originating station's license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being aired on the
facilities of a host station. The Commission will also include a note
on a host station's license identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 guest
signal(s) being aired on the facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. A Class A broadcaster must file an
application (FCC Form 2100) with the Commission, and receive Commission
approval, before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the facilities of a host station,
moving that signal from the facilities of an existing host station to
the facilities of a different host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities
of a host station (that has already converted to ATSC 3.0 operation),
moving its ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a different host
station, or discontinuing an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal or converting the station from ATSC 3.0 back to ATSC 1.0
transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect to an application in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section, a Class A broadcaster may file only
an application for modification of license provided no other changes
are being requested in such application that would require the filing
of an application for a construction permit as otherwise required by
the rules (see, e.g., Sec. 73.1690).
(4) Host station. A host station must first make any necessary
changes to its facilities before a guest station may file an
application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An application filed in accordance with
the streamlined process in paragraph (f)(3) of this section will
receive expedited processing provided, for stations requesting to air
an ATSC signal on the facilities of a host station, the station will
provide ATSC 1.0 service to at least 95 percent of the predicted
population within the noise limited service contour of its original
ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An application in paragraph (f)(2) of
this section must include the following information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating broadcaster's facility and the DMA
of the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed necessary by the Commission to
process the application.
(ii) If an application in paragraph (f)(2) of this section includes
a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a host
station, the broadcaster must, in addition to the information in
paragraph (f)(6)(i), also indicate on the application:
(A) The predicted population within the protected contour served by
the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal;
(B) The predicted population within the protected contour served by
the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal that will lose the station's
ATSC 1.0 service as a result of the simulcasting arrangement, including
identifying areas of service loss by providing a contour overlap map;
and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal aired on the host station
will serve at least 95 percent of the population in paragraph
(f)(6)(ii)(A) of this section.
(iii)(A) If an application in paragraph (f)(2) of this section
includes a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station and does not meet the 95 percent standard in paragraph
(f)(6)(ii) of this section, the application must contain, in addition
to the information in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section,
the following information:
(1) Whether there is another possible host station(s) in the market
that would result in less service loss to existing viewers and, if so,
why the Next Gen TV broadcaster chose to partner with a host station
creating a larger service loss;
(2) What steps, if any, the station plans to take to minimize the
impact of the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC 3.0 dongles, set-top
boxes, or gateway devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(3) The public interest benefits of the simulcasting arrangement
and a showing of why the benefit(s) of granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s).
(B) These applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
(g) Consumer education for Next Gen TV stations. (1) Class A
stations that relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a host
station's facilities, subsequently moving to a different host, or
returning to its original facility) will be required to air daily
Public Service Announcements (PSAs) or crawls every day for 30 days
prior to the date that the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0 operations
on their existing facilities. Stations that transition directly to ATSC
3.0 will be required to air daily PSAs or crawls every day for 30 days
prior to the date that the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0 operations.
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station and be
closed-captioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 signals or transitioning directly to ATSC 3.0, each PSA or crawl
must provide all pertinent information to consumers.
(h) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a temporary host station's facilities,
subsequently moving to a different host, or returning to its original
facility) must provide notice to MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry the station's ATSC 1.0
signal due to the relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be obligated to carry the station's
ATSC 1.0 signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section must contain the following
information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0 channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna position, location, or power
levels;
(iv) Stream identification information; and
(v) Engineering staff contact information.
[[Page 5026]]
(3) If any of the information in paragraph (h)(2) of this section
changes, an amended notification must be sent.
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals if the relocation occurs during the post-incentive auction
transition period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of relocating their ATSC 1.0
signals if the relocation occurs after the post-incentive auction
transition period.
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC 1.0 signal relocation
changes, the station must send a further notice to affected MVPDs
informing them of the new anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose whether to provide notice as
required by this section either by a letter notification or
electronically via email if the relevant MVPD agrees to receive such
notices by email. Letter notifications to MVPDs must be sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested to the MVPD's address in the
FCC's Online Public Inspection File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have an online file, notices may be
sent to the cable system's official address of record provided in the
system's most recent filing in the FCC's Cable Operations and Licensing
System (COALS). For MVPDs with no official address in OPIF or COALS,
the letter must be sent to the MVPD's official corporate address
registered with their State of incorporation.
0
10. Amend Sec. 73.8000 by adding paragraphs (b)(6) and (7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.8000 Incorporation by reference.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) ATSC A/321:2016, ``System Discovery and Signaling'' (March 23,
2016), IBR approved for Sec. 73.682.
(7) ATSC A/322:2017 ``Physical Layer Protocol'' (June 6, 2017), IBR
approved for Sec. 73.682.
* * * * *
PART 74--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES
0
11. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 310, 336 and 554.
0
12. Add Sec. 74.782 to subpart G to read as follows:
Sec. 74.782 Low power television and TV translator simulcasting
during the ATSC 3.0 (Next Gen TV) transition.
(a) Simulcasting arrangements. While broadcasters are voluntarily
deploying ATSC 3.0, a low power television (LPTV) or TV translator
station may partner with one or more other LPTV or TV translator
stations or with one or more full power or Class A stations in a
simulcasting arrangement for purposes of airing either an ATSC 1.0 or
ATSC 3.0 signal on a host station's (i.e., a station whose facilities
are being used to transmit programming originated by another station)
facilities.
(1) An LPTV or TV translator station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a full power host station must comply with
the rules of part 73 of this chapter governing power levels and
interference, and must comply in all other respects with the rules and
policies applicable to low power television or TV translator stations
set forth in this part.
(2) An LPTV or TV translator station airing an ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0
signal on the facilities of a Class A host station must comply with the
rules governing power levels and interference applicable to Class A
television stations, and must comply in all other respects with the
rules and policies applicable to LPTV or TV translator stations as set
forth in Part 74 of this chapter.
(b) Simulcasting requirement. An LPTV or TV translator station that
elects voluntarily to simulcast while broadcasters are voluntarily
deploying ATSC 3.0 must simulcast the primary video programming stream
of their ATSC 3.0 signal in an ATSC 1.0 format. This requirement does
not apply to any multicast streams aired on the ATSC 3.0 channel.
(1) The programming aired on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal must be
``substantially similar'' to that aired on the ATSC 3.0 primary video
programming stream. For purposes of this section, ``substantially
similar'' means that the programming must be the same except for
advertisements, promotions for upcoming programs, and programming
features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0. These
enhanced capabilities include:
(i) Hyper-localized content (e.g., geo-targeted weather, targeted
emergency alerts, and hyper-local news):
(ii) Programming features or improvements created for the ATSC 3.0
service (e.g., emergency alert ``wake up'' ability and interactive
program features);
(iii) Enhanced formats made possible by ATSC 3.0 technology (e.g.,
4K or HDR); and
(iv) Personalization of programming performed by the viewer and at
the viewer's discretion.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, programming
that airs at a different time on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal than on
the primary video programming stream of the ATSC 3.0 signal is not
considered ``substantially similar.''
(c) Transitioning directly to ATSC 3.0. LPTV and TV translator
stations may transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 operation
without simulcasting.
(d) Coverage requirements for the ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel. For
LPTV and TV translator stations that elect voluntarily to simulcast and
temporarily to relocate their ATSC 1.0 signal to the facilities of a
host station for purposes of deploying ATSC 3.0 service (and that
convert their existing facilities to ATSC 3.0), the station:
(1) Must maintain overlap between the protected contour of its
existing facilities and its ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal;
(2) May not relocate its ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal more than 30
miles from the reference coordinates of the relocating station's
existing antenna location; and
(3) Must select a host station assigned to the same Designated
Market Area as the originating station (i.e., the station whose
programming is being transmitted on the host station).
(e) Coverage requirements for ATSC 3.0 signals. For LPTV and TV
translator stations that elect voluntarily to simulcast and to continue
broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 from the station's existing facilities and
transmit an ATSC 3.0 signal from a host location, the ATSC 3.0 signal
must be established on a host station assigned to the same DMA as the
originating station.
(f) Simulcasting agreements. (1) Simulcasting agreements must
contain provisions outlining each licensee's rights and
responsibilities regarding:
(i) Access to facilities, including whether each licensee will have
unrestrained access to the host station's transmission facilities;
(ii) Allocation of bandwidth within the host station's channel;
(iii) Operation, maintenance, repair, and modification of
facilities, including a list of all relevant equipment, a description
of each party's financial obligations, and any relevant notice
provisions;
(iv) Conditions under which the simulcast agreement may be
terminated, assigned or transferred; and
(v) How a guest's station's (i.e., a station originating
programming that is
[[Page 5027]]
being transmitted using the facilities of a host station) signal may be
transitioned off the host station.
(2) LPTV and TV translators must maintain a written copy of any
simulcasting agreement and provide it to the Commission upon request.
(g) Licensing of simulcasting stations and stations converting to
ATSC 3.0 operation. (1) Each station participating in a simulcasting
arrangement pursuant to this section shall continue to be licensed and
operated separately, have its own call sign, and be separately subject
to all applicable Commission obligations, rules, and policies. ATSC 1.0
and ATSC 3.0 signals aired on the facilities of a host station will be
licensed as temporary second channels of the originating station. The
Commission will include a note on the originating station's license
identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 signal being aired on the
facilities of a host station. The Commission will also include a note
on a host station's license identifying any ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0 guest
signal(s) being aired on the facilities of the host station.
(2) Application required. An LPTV or TV translator broadcaster must
file an application (FCC Form 2100) with the Commission, and receive
Commission approval, before:
(i) Moving its ATSC 1.0 signal to the facilities of a host station,
moving that signal from the facilities of an existing host station to
the facilities of a different host station, or discontinuing an ATSC
1.0 guest signal;
(ii) Commencing the airing of an ATSC 3.0 signal on the facilities
of a host station (that has already converted to ATSC 3.0 operation),
moving its ATSC 3.0 signal to the facilities of a different host
station, or discontinuing an ATSC 3.0 guest signal; or
(iii) Converting its existing station to transmit an ATSC 3.0
signal or converting the station from ATSC 3.0 back to ATSC 1.0
transmissions.
(3) Streamlined process. With respect to an application in
paragraph (g)(2) of this section, an LPTV or TV translator broadcaster
may file only an application for modification of license provided no
other changes are being requested in such application that would
require the filing of an application for a construction permit as
otherwise required by the rules (see, e.g., Sec. Sec. 74.751 and
74.787).
(4) Host station. A host station must first make any necessary
changes to its facilities before a guest station may file an
application to air a 1.0 or 3.0 signal on such host.
(5) Expedited processing. An application filed in accordance with
the streamlined process in paragraph (g)(3) of this section will
receive expedited processing provided, for LPTV and TV translator
stations seeking voluntarily to simulcast and to air an ATSC 1.0 signal
on the facilities of a host station, the station will provide ATSC 1.0
service to at least 95 percent of the predicted population within the
protected contour of its original ATSC 1.0 facility.
(6) Required information. (i) An application in paragraph (g)(2) of
this section must include the following information:
(A) The station serving as the host, if applicable;
(B) The technical facilities of the host station, if applicable;
(C) The DMA of the originating broadcaster's facility and the DMA
of the host station, if applicable; and
(D) Any other information deemed necessary by the Commission to
process the application.
(ii) If an application in paragraph (g)(2) of this section includes
a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a host
station, the LPTV or TV translator broadcaster must also indicate on
the application:
(A) The predicted population within the protected contour served by
the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal;
(B) The predicted population within the protected contour served by
the station's original ATSC 1.0 signal that will lose the station's
ATSC 1.0 service as a result of the simulcasting arrangement, including
identifying areas of service loss by providing a contour overlap map;
and
(C) Whether the ATSC 1.0 simulcast signal aired on the host station
will serve at least 95 percent of the population in paragraph
(g)(6)(ii)(A) of this section.
(iii) If an application in paragraph (g)(2) of this section
includes a request to air an ATSC 1.0 signal on the facilities of a
host station and does not meet the 95 percent standard in paragraph
(g)(6)(ii) of this section, the application must contain, in addition
to the information in paragraphs (g)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section,
the following information:
(A) Whether there is another possible host station(s) in the market
that would result in less service loss to existing viewers and, if so,
why the Next Gen TV broadcaster chose to partner with a host station
creating a larger service loss;
(B) What steps, if any, the station plans to take to minimize the
impact of the service loss (e.g., providing ATSC 3.0 dongles, set-top
boxes, or gateway devices to viewers in the loss area); and
(C) The public interest benefits of the simulcasting arrangement
and a showing of why the benefit(s) of granting the application would
outweigh the harm(s). These applications will be considered on a case-
by-case basis.
(h) Consumer education for Next Gen TV stations. (1) LPTV and TV
translator stations that elect voluntarily to simulcast and that
relocate their ATSC 1.0 signals (e.g., moving to a host station's
facilities, subsequently moving to a different host, or returning to
its original facility) will be required to air daily Public Service
Announcements (PSAs) or crawls every day for 30 days prior to the date
that the stations will terminate ATSC 1.0 operations on their existing
facilities. LPTV and TV translator stations that transition directly to
ATSC 3.0 will be required to air daily Public Service Announcements
(PSAs) or crawls every day for 30 days prior to the date that the
stations will terminate ATSC 1.0 operations.
(2) PSAs. Each PSA must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station and be
closed-captioned.
(3) Crawls. Each crawl must be provided in the same language as a
majority of the programming carried by the transitioning station.
(4) Content of PSAs or crawls. For stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 signals or transitioning directly to ATSC 3.0, each PSA or crawl
must provide all pertinent information to consumers.
(i) Notice to MVPDs. (1) Next Gen TV stations relocating their ATSC
1.0 simulcast signals (e.g., moving to a temporary host station's
facilities, subsequently moving to a different host, or returning to
its original facility) must provide notice to MVPDs that:
(i) No longer will be required to carry the station's ATSC 1.0
signal due to the relocation; or
(ii) Carry and will continue to be obligated to carry the station's
ATSC 1.0 signal from the new location.
(2) The notice required by this section must contain the following
information:
(i) Date and time of any ATSC 1.0 channel changes;
(ii) The ATSC 1.0 channel occupied by the station before and after
commencement of local simulcasting;
(iii) Modification, if any, to antenna position, location, or power
levels;
(iv) Stream identification information; and
(v) Engineering staff contact information.
(3) If any of the information in paragraph (f)(2) of this section
changes, an amended notification must be sent.
[[Page 5028]]
(4)(i) Next Gen TV stations must provide notice as required by this
section:
(A) At least 120 days in advance of relocating their ATSC 1.0
simulcast signals if the relocation occurs during the post-incentive
auction transition period; or
(B) At least 90 days in advance of relocating their 1.0 simulcast
signals if the relocation occurs after the post-incentive auction
transition period.
(ii) If the anticipated date of the ATSC 1.0 service relocation
changes, the station must send a further notice to affected MVPDs
informing them of the new anticipated date.
(5) Next Gen TV stations may choose whether to provide notice as
required by this section either by a letter notification or
electronically via email if the relevant MVPD agrees to receive such
notices by email. Letter notifications to MVPDs must be sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested to the MVPD's address in the
FCC's Online Public Inspection File (OPIF), if the MVPD has an online
file. For cable systems that do not have an online file, notices must
be sent to the cable system's official address of record provided in
the system's most recent filing in the FCC's Cable Operations and
Licensing System (COALS). For MVPDs with no official address in OPIF or
COALS, the letter must be sent to the MVPD's official corporate address
registered with their State of incorporation.
PART 76--MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE
0
13. The authority citation for part 76 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303,
303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 338, 339, 340, 341, 503,
521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548,
549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573.
0
14. Amend Sec. 76.56 by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 76.56 Signal carriage obligations.
* * * * *
(h) Next Gen TV carriage rights. (1) A broadcast television station
that chooses to deploy Next Gen TV service, see Sec. 73.682(f) of this
chapter, may assert mandatory carriage rights under this section only
with respect to its ATSC 1.0 signal and may not assert mandatory
carriage rights with respect to its ATSC 3.0 signal.
(2) With respect to a Next Gen TV station that moves its 1.0
simulcast signal to a host station's (i.e., a station whose facilities
are being used to transmit programming originated by another station)
facilities, the station may assert mandatory carriage rights under this
section only if it:
(i) Qualified for, and has been exercising, mandatory carriage
rights at its original location; and
(ii) Continues to qualify for mandatory carriage at the host
station's facilities, including (but not limited to) delivering a good
quality 1.0 signal to the cable system principal headend, or agreeing
to be responsible for the costs of delivering such 1.0 signal to the
cable system.
0
15. Amend Sec. 76.66 by adding paragraph (o) to read as follows:
Sec. 76.66 Satellite broadcast signal carriage.
* * * * *
(o) Next Gen TV carriage rights. (1) A broadcast television station
that chooses to deploy Next Gen TV service, see Sec. 73.682(f) of this
chapter, may assert mandatory carriage rights under this section only
with respect to its ATSC 1.0 signal and may not assert mandatory
carriage rights with respect to its ATSC 3.0 signal.
(2) With respect to a Next Gen TV station that moves its 1.0
simulcast signal to a host station's (i.e., a station whose facilities
are being used to transmit programming originated by another station)
facilities, the station may assert mandatory carriage rights under this
section only if it:
(i) Qualified for, and has been exercising, mandatory carriage
rights at its original location; and
(ii) Continues to qualify for mandatory carriage at the host
station's facilities, including (but not limited to) delivering a good
quality 1.0 signal to the satellite carrier local receive facility, or
agreeing to be responsible for the costs of delivering such 1.0 signal
to the satellite carrier.
[FR Doc. 2018-01473 Filed 2-1-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P