Cable Television Technical and Operational Standards, 7619-7631 [2018-03547]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 36 (Thursday, February 22, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7619-7631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03547]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[MB Docket No. 12-217; FCC 17-120]


Cable Television Technical and Operational Standards

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, we modernize the Commission's signal leakage 
and signal quality rules that apply to cable operators and other MVPDs 
and reflect the cable industry's transition from analog to digital 
systems. These rules are intended to make sure that cable systems do 
not leak signals that could interfere with other services and ensure 
that subscribers receive high-quality picture and sound.

DATES: These rules are effective April 23, 2018, except the amendments 
to Sec. Sec.  76.105(b) introductory text, 76.601(b)(1), 76.1610(f) and 
(g), and 76.1804 introductory text, which contain modified information 
collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB, subject to 
the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Federal Communications Commission will 
publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective 
date upon OMB approval. The incorporation by reference of certain 
publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register as of April 23, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Jeffrey Neumann, [email protected], of the 
Media Bureau, 202-2046 or Brendan Murray, [email protected], of 
the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-1573.
    For additional information concerning the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, send an email to [email protected] 
or contact Cathy Williams on (202) 418-2918.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, FCC 17-120, adopted on September 22, 2017 and released on 
September 25, 2017. The full text of these documents is available for 
public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC 
Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street 
SW, CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also be 
available via ECFS (https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be 
available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) The 
complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
445 12th Street SW, Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. To request 
these documents in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, 
audio recording, and Braille), send an email to [email protected] or call 
the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-
0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    With this Report and Order (Order), we take another step toward 
modernizing our rules to reflect current technologies. Specifically, we 
update our signal leakage and signal quality rules that apply to cable 
operators to reflect the cable industry's transition from analog to 
digital systems.
    In 2012, the Commission adopted the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, 
77 FR 61351, to seek comment on proposed digital ``proof of 
performance'' (i.e., signal quality) rules, signal leakage rules, and 
updates and corrections to our Part 76 rules. As the Commission 
explained in that NPRM, the purpose of the proof-of-performance rules 
is to require cable operators to deliver good-quality video and audio 
to subscribers. The Commission's authority for adopting such rules 
stems from Section 624 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 
(the ``Act''). The signal leakage rules prevent cable systems from 
emitting signals that can interfere with radio services, including 
certain aeronautical communication services.
    The Commission originally adopted the current proof-of-performance 
and signal leakage rules before the advent of digital cable service, 
which is now widespread. According to SNL Kagan, almost 97 percent of 
cable video customers subscribe to digital service, and all major 
operators provide digital service. As a technical matter, our existing 
signal quality and interference rules are inapplicable to the digital 
technologies that cable operators use today. The Commission has not, to 
date, provided clear guidance on how to ensure digital signal quality 
and safeguard against digital systems leaking electromagnetic signals 
into the aeronautical bands. Therefore, in the Digital Cable Standards 
NPRM, the Commission proposed to update its technical rules to 
incorporate standards and procedures that cable operators and local 
franchising authorities (LFAs)

[[Page 7620]]

could use to test signal quality and signal leakage on digital cable 
systems.
    The Commission's analog proof-of-performance rules currently 
include testing requirements, technical standards, testing methods, 
recordkeeping requirements, and procedures to resolve complaints about 
signal quality to ensure that cable operators provide their subscribers 
with good quality signals. In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the 
Commission proposed to replicate this framework by adopting similar 
rules that would apply to digital cable service. Specifically, the 
Commission proposed to require Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) 
based digital cable systems to test signals in accordance with the 
Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) Digital Cable 
Network Interface Standard, SCTE 40 and maintain records that 
demonstrate the results of such tests. The Commission sought comment on 
standards or guidance for testing cable systems that do not rely on QAM 
because non-QAM systems rely on varied technologies, and the Commission 
was not aware of any industry standards that non-QAM operators could 
use to test their signal quality. Accordingly, the Commission sought 
comment on an alternative proposal under which non-QAM providers would 
file a proof-of-performance plan with the Commission. The Commission 
also asked whether there were ``any entities currently analyzing and 
developing standards for visual signal quality,'' or whether a 
subjective analysis of visual signal quality could be used to 
demonstrate proof-of-performance.
    As the Commission explained in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, 
cable systems have the potential to interfere with over-the-air users 
of spectrum if the cable operator does not properly maintain its plant. 
The Commission's existing rules are designed to minimize interference 
to aircraft communications, and include yearly testing and reporting 
requirements. In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission 
proposed to add new interference standards that would apply to digital 
signals to accompany the existing analog signal interference standards. 
The proposed digital standards would provide protection to aircraft 
communication from digital cable plant signal leakage that is 
equivalent to that provided via our existing analog standards. The 
Commission also sought comment on whether to make other modifications 
to the rules to protect other frequencies based on the increased 
bandwidth of modern cable systems.
    The Commission also proposed updates to Part 76 of our rules. In 
the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission proposed to make 
necessary updates to various standards, reorganize certain sections of 
Part 76 to make them easier to read, make numerous rule corrections, 
and remove numerous obsolete rules and references from the Code of 
Federal Regulations. These changes are minor and non-substantive and 
intended to make it easier to comprehend and comply with the 
Commission's cable rules.
    As the Commission proposed in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, we 
will require cable operators to adhere to SCTE 40, the technical 
standard that ensures that cable operators provide ``good quality'' 
signals to their subscribers. We decline, however, to adopt the proof-
of-performance testing and recordkeeping rules proposed in the Digital 
Cable Standards NPRM. The record and the Commission's log of consumer 
complaints indicate that there is not a continuing pattern of technical 
problems with digital signals as historically existed with analog 
signals. We attribute this, in part, to the process of error correction 
that the QAM standard uses; it generally ensures that digital signals 
have suitable picture and audio quality even under suboptimal 
conditions. Therefore, we conclude that a testing regime for digital 
service is not necessary, and that an operator's adherence to SCTE 40 
is sufficient to ensure consumers are receiving good quality signals. 
We also decline at this time to adopt performance standards for non-QAM 
cable systems pending further developments and recommendations from 
industry standards bodies. Below, we discuss (1) why the SCTE 40 
standard is the proper standard to ensure quality digital signals for 
QAM-based cable operators, (2) why we delay adoption of a standard for 
non-QAM-based cable operators, (3) why a rigid testing regime is 
unnecessary, and (4) why subjective testing and set-top box 
requirements are not necessary at this time. We also dismiss as moot 
pending requests for exemption from our proof-of-performance rules.
    Section 624(e) of the Act requires that the Commission ``establish 
minimum technical standards relating to cable systems' technical 
operation and signal quality'' and ``update such standards periodically 
to reflect improvements in technology.'' Pursuant to that mandate, we 
adopt the Commission's proposal to adopt the SCTE 40 standard. QAM-
based cable operators that adhere to this standard provide good-quality 
signals to consumers, and a rule that requires cable operators to 
adhere to it will not increase their regulatory burden. SCTE 40, the 
``Digital Cable Network Interface Standard,'' was developed by the 
Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers to define the 
characteristics and specifications of interface between a cable system 
and commercially available digital cable products, such as set-top 
boxes. The overwhelming majority of cable operators use QAM to modulate 
their digital services, but as the Commission explained in the Digital 
Cable Standards NPRM, QAM use can vary across systems: ``Unlike analog 
cable transmission . . . QAM is not uniform and may appear in a variety 
of configurations such as 64 QAM, 256 QAM, and potentially 1024 QAM, 
each requiring different performance standards.'' The SCTE 40 standard 
recognizes these differences and incorporates different performance 
standards for each QAM configuration. Moreover, QAM-based cable 
operators have followed the SCTE 40 standard for more than a decade 
because the standard is an essential part of the cable industry's 
reliance on CableCARD. Therefore, conforming to the standard should not 
add any additional burdens on cable operators and commenters generally 
supported its use for this purpose. The standard sets relative channel 
power limits, carrier-to-noise ratios, and adjacent-channel 
characteristics that reflect the minimum technical standards necessary 
to ensure that cable operators deliver quality QAM signals to their 
subscribers. The standard is for free online at https://www.scte.org/SCTEDocs/Standards/SCTE%2040%202016.pdf, and therefore we conclude that 
it is reasonably available. For these reasons, we conclude that SCTE 40 
provides the proper ``minimum technical standards relating to cable 
systems' technical operation and signal quality,'' as required by 
Section 624(e) of the Act. Consistent with Section 624(e)'s requirement 
that we update the standards in our rules ``periodically to reflect 
improvements in technology'' and to reflect the technology that cable 
operators rely on today, we incorporate the current version of SCTE 40, 
which was adopted in 2016.
    The City of New York suggests that we set a timeframe for when we 
will next review these standards. We agree that updating these 
performance standards in a timely manner is important, but because the 
SCTE standard is not updated on a set schedule, we do not believe that 
we need to develop a rigid timeline for review. The SCTE originally 
adopted the SCTE 40 standard in 2001, and

[[Page 7621]]

updated it in 2003, 2004, 2011, and 2016. If the SCTE updates the 
standard again, and the standard does not change fundamentally, we 
delegate rulemaking authority to the Media Bureau to update the 
Commission's rules to reference the newest standard.

Non-QAM Based Proof of Performance Standard

    We will delay adopting a proof-of-performance standard for non-QAM 
cable providers, such as internet Protocol television (IPTV)-based 
providers, because the record before us does not include any minimum 
technical standards that could apply to non-QAM signals. As stated 
above, in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission sought 
comment on whether any industry standards exist for signal quality in 
non-QAM digital cable systems. Although the National Telecommunications 
Cooperative Association and The Organization for the Promotion and 
Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (NTCA/OPASTCO) 
reference certain standards that ``may apply to IPTV systems,'' they 
note that ``these best practices and standards are relatively new, and 
a number of [rural local exchange carrier] IPTV systems utilizing many 
different types of equipment and software were deployed prior to their 
development and release'' so they may not apply to all IPTV systems. No 
other comments recommended a standard that could apply to these 
systems. Accordingly, we believe it would be better to allow industry 
more time to reach consensus on a non-QAM-specific proof-of-performance 
standard before adopting a standard for regulatory purposes. When 
parties can identify and recommend applicable proof-of-performance 
standards, then we will revisit this issue. We note that in the 
meantime, under our existing rules non-QAM providers must work with 
LFAs to address any complaints regarding signal quality.
    We will not require non-QAM operators to submit proof-of-
performance plans for Commission approval, which is a scheme upon which 
the Commission sought comment in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM. 
Cable operators that use technologies other than QAM to deliver video 
strongly oppose that process as overly burdensome; they argue that non-
QAM operators are small and do not have in-house resources to develop 
signal quality standards and testing regimes in the absence of an 
industry standard. We find commenters' arguments persuasive; this 
process would put too large a burden on small cable operators, and 
likely would result in a variety of metrics rather than a standard as 
Section 624(e) requires.
    We are not persuaded by NATOA's argument that this case-by-case 
scheme would ``provide regulatory clarity, promote competitive 
neutrality, and ensure that subscribers to such non-QAM systems enjoy 
technical and signal quality protections comparable to those enjoyed by 
subscribers to more traditional QAM-based systems.'' To the contrary, 
such a scheme would provide no regulatory clarity because each operator 
would need to develop a testing plan without any guidance from the 
Commission. It would impose heavier burdens on non-QAM providers than 
their QAM-based competitors that will follow SCTE 40 rather than 
develop performance standards in-house.
    We also reject NATOA's proposal that ``[e]ach channel tested for 
proof-of-performance should be observed for at least two minutes and 
the results of this observation recorded'' by the cable operator. A 
regime that required that proposal would be subjective, non-technical, 
and would not be standardized. Accordingly, we do not believe that such 
a proposal is the type of ``minimum technical standard'' contemplated 
under Section 624(e).
    We conclude that we need not require the testing regime (and 
attendant certification and recordkeeping requirements) proposed in the 
Digital Cable Standards NPRM. We come to this conclusion because cable 
operators have demonstrated that if they design, deploy, and maintain 
systems that meet or exceed the specifications in SCTE 40, then they 
are able to deliver good-quality video and audio to their subscribers 
without testing. As ACA and NCTA point out, the error correction 
inherent in QAM service helps ensure consistent quality for 
subscribers. In addition, digital signals are less susceptible to 
errors introduced by noise and the picture degradation that amplifiers 
add to analog signals. Nonetheless, some LFA commenters reported 
problems with pixelation, tiling, and loss of audio. These appear to be 
isolated incidents, rather than a continuation of a trend of poor 
signal quality that existed when cable operators delivered analog 
signals, and the Commission has received few complaints about cable 
operators' signal quality. Even if there were a trend of poor quality, 
the record does not reflect that testing would yield any additional 
information necessary to ensure quality signals.
    Moreover, according to the record, the costs associated with 
testing are high and outweigh the benefits that a federal testing 
mandate would provide. NCTA states that due to equipment and personnel 
costs, testing for compliance with SCTE 40 can cost ``just under a 
million dollars to multiple millions of dollars simply to conduct a 
one-time test'' of all of a large cable operator's systems, and that 
testing can be disruptive to subscribers. NATOA argues that ``periodic 
test reports generate data that assist local authorities with complaint 
resolution, monitoring performance, and other regulatory 
responsibilities.'' A rigid testing mandate is not necessary to achieve 
these benefits. Section 76.1713 of our rules requires cable operators 
to ``establish a process for resolving complaints from subscribers 
about the quality of the television signal delivered,'' and maintain 
aggregate data about those complaints for purposes of Commission and 
LFA review. This rule section already delivers the benefits that NATOA 
enumerates without a costly, rigid testing requirement.
    Nor does the statute require a testing regime. Rather, the statute 
directs us to establish ``minimum technical standards,'' and neither 
the Act nor the legislative history indicates that Congress wanted the 
Commission to require tests in the absence of service problems. When a 
consumer complains about signal quality, the cable operator and the 
local franchisor are better suited than the Commission to work to 
resolve the problem using industry-standard methods and recommended 
practices. We invite LFAs and others to keep us informed about the 
complaints that they receive from their residents; we will consider 
adopting more rigorous requirements if systemic signal quality problems 
are demonstrated.
    Finally, with respect to analog testing, we adopt the Commission's 
proposal to ``simplify the formula by which . . . operators determine 
how many channels must be tested to ensure compliance with the proof-
of-performance rules.'' Specifically, the Commission proposed to 
require cable operators to test five channels on systems with a channel 
capacity of less than 550 MHz, and to require cable operators to test 
ten channels on systems with a channel capacity of 550 MHz or more. 
NCTA is the only commenter to address this proposal and ``agree[s] with 
the effort to reduce the number of channels that must be tested to 
demonstrate compliance with the technical standards.'' We adopt this 
rule for the same reasons the Commission proposed it: The rule change 
``simplifies compliance for all operators and will continue to ensure 
that a sufficient representative sample of channels is

[[Page 7622]]

tested to accurately reflect the experience consumers receive.''
    We also decline to adopt subjective picture quality and set-top box 
quality rules. In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission 
noted that cable operators could reduce a channel's visual quality via 
compression even if the signal itself remains strong and error free. To 
address this concern, the Commission sought comment on whether to adopt 
a subjective visual picture quality and auditory sound quality test to 
ensure that digital cable subscribers receive high quality television 
images and sound. The Commission also sought comment on whether set-top 
boxes should play a role in how we assess picture quality of digital 
cable signals, because set-top boxes can affect the quality of the 
picture that the viewer sees. We find that the record is insufficient 
to take any action on these two items, producing neither standards for 
perceived video quality nor the output of set-top boxes. As some 
parties point out, subjective tests are, by their nature, difficult to 
administer. Moreover, the record has not demonstrated that there is a 
serious problem regarding picture quality that we need to address. 
Therefore, we decline to extend proof-of-performance beyond the signal 
quality provided to the consumer's home by the MVPD. We also reject the 
suggestion that we require proof-of-performance tests for CableCARDs 
because, as NCTA points out, CableCARDs are responsible solely for 
decryption of cable programming and do not affect signal quality or 
display.
    Six cable operators have filed requests for exemption from our 
proof-of-performance rules because those operators cannot apply the 
analog standards to their digital systems. To the extent these 
operators utilize QAM-based technologies, as discussed above, we 
conclude that their adherence to SCTE 40 ensures good signal quality. 
Accordingly, we dismiss as moot those requests for exemption from the 
proof-of-performance rules consistent with this order and instruct 
these cable operators and the rest of the cable industry deploying QAM-
based technologies to adhere to SCTE 40 2016, as required by our new 
proof of performance rule.
    For the request pertaining to a non-QAM-based system, and for other 
operators who use non-QAM and non-analog technologies, such as those 
based on internet Protocol video over fiber-optics, we will simply 
retain the duty of those operators to establish and use a process to 
resolve customer complaints for now and will not require them to adhere 
to SCTE 40, which does not align technically with the design of their 
systems. As we explain above, we believe it would be better to allow 
industry more time to reach consensus on a non-QAM-specific proof-of-
performance standard before adopting a standard for regulatory purposes 
since the record before us does not include any minimum technical 
standards that could apply to non-QAM signals. If the Commission 
establishes metrics-based or testing-based rules in the future to cover 
those non-QAM technologies, those operators will be subject to those 
rules. As a result, we dismiss as moot the petition for exemption filed 
by a non-QAM system operator.
    In this Section, we adopt the signal leakage rules for MVPDs 
utilizing digital signals on coaxial cable systems proposed in the 
Digital Cable Standards NPRM with minor modifications. In the NPRM, the 
Commission explained the purpose of our cable signal leakage rules: 
MVPDs that operate coaxial cable plants (``coaxial cable systems'') use 
frequencies allocated for myriad over-the-air services within their 
system. Under ideal circumstances, those signals are confined within 
the cable system and do not cause interference with the over-the-air 
users of those frequencies. However, under certain circumstances, a 
coaxial cable plant can ``leak'' and interfere with over-the-air users 
of spectrum.
    To prevent this interference, the Commission's rules impose four 
major requirements. First, MVPDs that operate coaxial cable plants 
(referred to as simply ``MVPDs'' below) must notify the Commission and 
provide geographic information about their systems before they use 
frequencies in the aeronautical radio frequency bands above an average 
power level equal to or greater than 10-4 watts across a 25 kHz 
bandwidth in any 160 microsecond time period. The Commission refers to 
this requirement as the Aeronautical Frequency Notification (``AFN'') 
requirement. Second, MVPDs must offset their channels to minimize 
interference from analog coaxial cable systems to aircraft 
communication and aircraft navigation services, such as the Instrument 
Landing System and VHF Omnidirectional Range service. Third, MVPDs must 
ensure that their system design, installation and operation comply with 
the rules and conduct compliance testing four times per year. Finally, 
MVPDs must calculate their cumulative signal leakage and report their 
results to the Commission once per year.
    These requirements protect against interference from analog 
signals, but have not been updated to protect against interference from 
digital signals. Therefore, in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the 
Commission proposed to update the signal leakage rules to apply to 
digital operations. First, the Commission proposed a trigger of 10-5 
watts average power over a 30 kHz bandwidth in any 2.5 millisecond time 
period for the AFN requirement with respect to digital signals. The 
Commission explained that this proposed trigger would impose only 
limited burdens on cable operators because it would affect a small 
number of systems and was vital to prevent interference to aeronautical 
users and international satellite search and rescue services. Second, 
the Commission proposed not to apply the channel frequency offset 
requirement to digital signals. The Commission reasoned that the analog 
channel frequency offset does not make sense to apply to digital 
signals because the offset is meant to offset the peak power of a 
signal from interfering with aeronautical frequencies, but digital 
signals, unlike analog signals, distribute their power evenly 
throughout the 6 MHz channel. Third, because the Commission proposed 
not to adopt a digital signal offset, the Commission proposed to 
correlate the maximum leakage level for digital signals to that of 
analog signals, and to require digital leakage in excess of this 
threshold to be noted and repaired within a reasonable time. The 
Commission reasoned that this change would help prevent harmful 
interference due to cable signal leakage. As discussed below, we adopt 
slightly revised versions of each of these proposals.
    Finally, the Commission sought comment on miscellaneous issues, 
each of which is discussed below, including whether to change the 
signal leakage testing methodology, whether and how to test for leakage 
in bands above 400 MHz, and a proposal to modify the formula for 
calculating the cumulative leakage index (``CLI'').
    We adopt the digital AFN filing trigger proposed in the Digital 
Cable Standards NPRM (10-5 watts over a 30 kHz bandwidth in any 2.5 
millisecond time period), and clarify that this filing trigger will 
apply to digital signals only; the analog trigger will not change. The 
Commission tentatively concluded in the NPRM that the power threshold 
should remain unchanged when considering interference from digital, 
rather than analog, coaxial cable systems, but that the measurement 
window needed to be adapted. The Commission based its proposal on the 
fact that unlike analog signals, digital

[[Page 7623]]

signals distribute power relatively evenly throughout the channel and, 
therefore, throughout the bandwidth of the devices receiving the 
interference.
    NCTA suggests two revisions to the Commission's proposal. First, 
NCTA argues that the Commission's proposed rule would require cable 
systems that ``operate aural subcarriers of analog television channels 
at levels that fall between 10-4 watts and 10-5 watts'' to file AFNs. 
NCTA asserts that requiring operators that carry analog signals at 
those levels to file AFNs would have no effect on public safety, and 
would burden cable operators. Instead NCTA suggests that the new power 
level trigger should apply to digital signals only, and the analog 
level should remain unchanged. NCTA's recommendation is consistent with 
the intent of the Commission's proposal in the Digital Cable Standards 
NPRM, which was to trigger the AFN filing requirement only for systems 
that had withdrawn their AFNs because they operate at a power level 
lower than the analog threshold, but operate at a power higher than the 
digital threshold that we adopt here. Therefore, we adopt NCTA's 
recommendation.
    NCTA also suggests that the Commission align the power threshold 
for digital signal notifications with the power thresholds discussed in 
Section III.B.3 below by lowering the AFN threshold by a commensurate 
amount. We decline to adopt this recommendation. We believe that the 
threshold for giving the Commission notice of a system's operation, 
location, and reach should be keyed to the protection of the Marine and 
Aeronautical Distress and Safety frequency. The burden of filing a one-
time notification is low, and the benefit to public health and safety 
of being able to identify potential sources of interference is 
significant.
    We exempt all-fiber-optic cable systems from the AFN filing trigger 
and instead allow cable operators with such systems to notify the 
Commission that the system operates below the relevant power level. 
Verizon asserts that the signal leakage rules should not apply to 
operators that, like Verizon, rely primarily on fiber optic systems 
that are less likely to leak electromagnetic signals. Verizon explains 
that its cable service is ``delivered over a fiber optic network that 
delivers signals to customer premises over fiber optic cables using 
optical wavelengths,'' and that ``[s]uch a network would not represent 
any threat of interference, because fiber optic cables do not use RF 
frequencies.'' It further explains that its optical network terminal 
``has been designed and built in a manner that operates at a low power 
level--below the thresholds that would trigger testing under current 
signal leakage testing standards.'' We agree that all-fiber-optic 
systems pose less interference risk than other systems and should be 
subject to less burdensome signal leakage requirements. Specifically, 
because fiber optic systems with optical network terminals at the 
customer premises pose minimal risk of signal leakage, such systems 
need only report in the existing Form 321, Aeronautical Frequency 
Notification, that their power level is sufficiently low to qualify for 
a filing exemption. Such cable operators may choose this option instead 
of complying with the digital AFN filing trigger. Cable operators that 
do not have optical network terminals at the customer premises or are 
unable to certify that they operate below a digital threshold of 37.55 
dBmV must comply with the digital AFN filing trigger. We find that this 
approach will appropriately enable cable operators that are unlikely to 
cause harmful interference to continue their current practice with 
regard to signal leakage reporting, while still ensuring that the 
Commission is informed of potential interference risks.
    As proposed in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, we decline to 
apply the channel frequency offset requirements that apply to analog 
signals to digital signals. Analog television channel power levels are 
significantly higher at the center frequencies of the subcarriers 
contained within the channel. Digital television channel power levels 
do not share this characteristic because a digital signal does not 
concentrate all of its power in a narrow carrier. For this reason, the 
Commission's rules require cable operators to offset their subcarriers 
from lining up directly with Instrument Landing System (ILS), VHF 
Omnidirectional Range service (VOR), or communications carriers. With 
the offset, when a signal leaks it will not align with those important 
carriers and it will not impact the protected signal as severely as it 
would without an offset. In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the 
Commission proposed not to apply the channel frequency offset 
requirement to digital signals because digital signals do not have 
analog signals' peak power characteristic. Commenters agreed with this 
reasoning. For the same reasons that the Commission offered in the 
NPRM, we conclude that the frequency offset requirement would be 
useless with respect to digital signals.
    We adopt rules for general signal leakage limits and for the 
cumulative leakage index (CLI) that were proposed in the NPRM, with 
some modifications to provide cable operators with flexibility in the 
ways they test to demonstrate compliance. Because we cannot use the 
offset requirement to ensure that the strongest part of the signal does 
not interfere with ILS, VOR, or communications carriers, the Commission 
proposed to correlate the signal leakage limits for digital channels to 
those for analog channels. Specifically, it proposed to adjust the 
signal leakage threshold for digital signals to 1.2 dB less than the 
analog threshold. The Commission reasoned that because a digital signal 
does not concentrate all of its power in a narrow carrier like an 
analog signal does and because an aircraft receiver's bandwidth should 
be no wider than 25 kHz, the resulting increase in potential 
interference is 1.2 dB. The Commission proposed to amend the general 
signal leakage rule (including the signal leakage monitoring, logging, 
and repair rule) and the CLI rules accordingly.
    We adopt the proposed general signal leakage limit that the 
Commission proposed for digital signals. NATOA and NCTA were the only 
commenters that addressed the Commission's proposal to make the general 
signal leakage threshold for digital signals 1.2 dB lower than the 
analog threshold, and both supported the proposal. For the reasons the 
Commission provided in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, we conclude 
that the 1.2 dB reduction for digital signals is a technically sound 
proposal, and therefore we adopt it.
    The Commission noted that this change could require cable operators 
that carry digital signals to obtain more sensitive leakage detection 
equipment because our rules require regular monitoring of systems that 
operate in the designated aeronautical communications bands. The 
Commission sought comment on the burdens that this would impose on 
cable operators and the extent to which they outweigh the benefits of 
signal leakage detection and prevention. In response, Arcom Digital, 
LLC described its low-cost QAM Snare system, which is sensitive enough 
to detect ``QAM channel leakage signals that are as low as 
0.13[micro]V/m at 100 MHz and as low as 0.89[micro]V/m at 700 MHz.'' 
NCTA described an alternative test methodology ``that would allow cable 
operators to continue to use existing signal leakage detection 
equipment with the same sensitivity, measurement procedures, 
calculations and reporting.'' Under NCTA's proposal (the ``David Large 
Methodology''), the cable operator simply carries a test signal that 
has an

[[Page 7624]]

average power level equal to the power level of the strongest analog 
cable television carrier on the cable system. To ensure that digital 
signal leakage is at least 1.2 dB lower than analog signals, the cable 
operator keeps all digital signal power levels at least 1.2 dB lower 
than the test signal. Because Arcom Digital, LLC and NCTA have 
demonstrated multiple ways to achieve our intended result, we grant 
NCTA's request that the Commission not impose any specific test 
methodology, but rather adopt a flexible rule that would allow a cable 
operator to ``demonstrate compliance using a different methodology.'' 
Our results-oriented regulation will ensure that cable operators 
monitor digital cable signal leakage in a less burdensome manner than 
the one we proposed.
    We adopt the level that the Commission proposed to trigger the 
signal leakage rules, and clarify that proposal as NCTA requests. The 
Commission proposed to modify the level ``at which the [signal leakage] 
rules become applicable, the threshold at which leaks must be included 
in the [CLI] calculation, and the maximum leakage and CLI 
permissible,'' for digital signals consistent with the 1.2 dB reduction 
from the analog signal levels. NCTA states that under the David Large 
Methodology, ``no additional change would be required to [the] CLI 
calculations since digital power levels would be required to be below 
the level of the leakage test signal.'' We find that NCTA's proposal is 
consistent with the Commission's reasoning in the Digital Cable 
Standards NPRM. Therefore, in a scenario where a cable operator 
maintains digital signals at least 1.2 dB below the analog leakage test 
signal, the operator may perform an ``analog'' test on the analog test 
signal and will be restricted to the maximum CLI for analog signals (64 
for I[infin]). However, we do not require operators to do this, and 
should they elect to carry digital signals at the same power levels as 
the analog test signal, or to test the digital signals directly, the 
reduced ``digital'' CLI applies.
    We decline to adjust our signal leakage rules at this time to 
reflect recent increases in the bandwidth that cable systems use. As 
the Commission noted in the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the last time 
the Commission updated the signal leakage rules, ``400 MHz was near the 
upper limit of the bandwidth of coaxial cable systems deployed,'' but 
today ``coaxial cable systems routinely deploy in excess of 750 MHz, 
and deployments of up to 1 GHz exist.'' Therefore, the Commission 
sought comment on potential and actual interference from coaxial cable 
systems to bands above 400 MHz. While such interference may exist 
(particularly in the 700 MHz band), there is insufficient evidence on 
the record to take action at this time.
    We eliminate the I3000 method of calculating CLI as the Commission 
proposed because cable operators have abandoned it in favor of the more 
effective I[infin] method. The I[infin] method of calculating CLI 
requires cable operators to treat all leaks equally, rather than 
discounting leaks the further they are from the geographic center of 
the cable system. In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission 
reasoned that cable systems now cover much larger geographical areas 
than they did when the Commission first adopted the rules, which can 
make the I3000 formula an inadequate way to detect significant leaks. 
We believe that these changes will make it easier to understand and 
comply with our cable rules. Accordingly, the Commission proposed to 
limit the application of I3000 to systems with a total geographic 
diameter of less than 160 km. We received no comments on this proposal, 
and careful analysis of filings from operators over the last 10 years 
shows that the overwhelming majority of operators utilize the I[infin] 
calculation. Therefore, in the interest of simplifying both the 
submission of information to the Commission, and simplifying the 
analysis of this data, we instead decide to eliminate the I3000 
formula. Operators previously using I3000 will find that less data 
collection is necessary to submit an I[infin] calculation, and so we 
find no reason to continue accepting and analyzing two separate 
calculation methods.
    In the Digital Cable Standards NPRM, the Commission proposed to 
``remove references to effective dates that have passed, make editorial 
corrections, delete obsolete rules, update various technical standards 
that are incorporated by reference into our rules, and clarify language 
in Part 76 of our rules.'' The proposed changes are non-substantive and 
were unopposed in the record. Accordingly, we adopt those proposals.\1\ 
NATOA recommended several changes to Part 76 of our rules that go 
beyond our goal of updating our rules and making them easier to follow. 
These proposals are substantive in nature, and are beyond the stated 
intent of this proceeding. Moreover, because NATOA's proposed rule 
changes were not raised for comment in the Digital Cable Standards 
NPRM, nor a logical outgrowth of the rule changes proposed in that 
NPRM, there is insufficient notice and comment under the Administrative 
Procedure Act for the Commission to adopt such proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We update the incorporation by reference in Sec. Sec.  
76.602 and 76.605 to refer to the 2013 version of the standard, CTA-
542-D, which replaces CEA-542-B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Rule Making (NPRM). The 
Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the NPRM, 
including comment on the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
    This Report and Order allows the Commission to fulfil its 
congressional mandate to establish ``minimum technical standards 
relating to cable systems' technical operation and signal quality'' and 
``update such standards periodically to reflect improvements in 
technology,'' as stated in the Communications Act. It will reduce 
malfunctions by setting proof-of-performance rules that require 
operators to ensure that their systems are consistent with industry 
standards designed to deliver high quality signals, which means that 
consumers will receive good quality pictures and sound. The Report and 
Order also makes modifications throughout Part 76 of the Commission's 
rules to remove outdated language, correct citations, and make other 
minor or non-substantive updates.
    Commenters raised concerns that the proposed reporting 
requirements, which would have required them to develop a signal 
quality test and file the results of that test with the Commission, 
would impose an undue burden on small businesses. After analyzing the 
responses of commenters, the Commission concludes that cable operators 
who design, deploy, and maintain a system which meets or exceeds the 
specifications in SCTE 40 will consistently provide a service producing 
suitable picture and audio quality to subscribers. Rather than imposing 
testing on cable operators to ensure that they deliver quality service, 
we instead require that cable operators adhere to the specifications in 
the widely followed SCTE 40 standard.
    As many commenters highlighted, Quadrature Amplitude Modulated 
(``QAM'') services are designed with error correction ability which 
helps to ensure consistent quality for subscribers. Additionally, as 
opposed to analog, digital signals are far less susceptible to errors 
introduced by noise and the picture degradation amplifiers add.

[[Page 7625]]

    Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, the Commission is 
required to respond to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA), and to provide a 
detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rules as a result 
of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in 
response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
    The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).
    Cable and Other Program Distribution. Since 2007, these services 
have been defined within the broad economic census category of Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows: 
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category, which is: All such firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were a total 
of 955 firms in the subcategory of Cable and Other Program Distribution 
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 939 firms had 
employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 16 firms had employment of 
1000 employees or more. Thus, under this size standard, the Commission 
believes that a majority of firms operating in this industry can be 
considered small.
    Cable Companies and Systems (Rate Regulation Standard). The 
Commission has also developed its own small business size standards, 
for the purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, 
a ``small cable company'' is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers, 
nationwide. Industry data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators 
nationwide, all but 11 are small under this size standard. In addition, 
under the Commission's rules, a ``small system'' is a cable system 
serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. Industry data indicate that, of 
6,635 systems nationwide, 5,802 systems have under 10,000 subscribers, 
and an additional 302 systems have 10,000-19,999 subscribers. Thus, 
under this second size standard, the Commission believes that most 
cable systems are small.
    Cable System Operators. The Act also contains a size standard for 
small cable system operators, which is ``a cable operator that, 
directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 
percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated 
with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the 
aggregate exceed $250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that an 
operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small 
operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual 
revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the 
aggregate. Industry data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators 
nationwide, all but 10 are small under this size standard. We note that 
the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether 
cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual 
revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore we are unable to estimate 
more accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify 
as small under this size standard.
    Open Video Services. Open Video Service (OVS) systems provide 
subscription services. The open video system (``OVS'') framework was 
established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily recognized options 
for the provision of video programming services by local exchange 
carriers. The OVS framework provides opportunities for the distribution 
of video programming other than through cable systems. Because OVS 
operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within the SBA small 
business size standard covering cable services, which is ``Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers.'' The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for this category, which is: All such firms having 1,500 
or fewer employees. To gauge small business prevalence for the OVS 
service, the Commission relies on data currently available from the 
U.S. Census for the year 2007. According to that source, there were 
3,188 firms that in 2007 were Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Of 
these, 3,144 operated with less than 1,000 employees, and 44 operated 
with more than 1,000 employees. However, as to the latter 44 there is 
no data available that shows how many operated with more than 1,500 
employees. Based on this data, the majority of these firms can be 
considered small. In addition, we note that the Commission has 
certified some OVS operators, with some now providing service. 
Broadband service providers (``BSPs'') are currently the only 
significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises. The 
Commission does not have financial or employment information regarding 
the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be 
operational. Thus, at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as 
small entities. The Commission further notes that it has certified 
approximately 45 OVS operators to serve 116 areas, and some of these 
are currently providing service. Affiliates of Residential 
Communications Network, Inc. (RCN) received approval to operate OVS 
systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, DC, and other areas. RCN 
has sufficient revenues to assure that they do not qualify as a small 
business entity. Little financial information is available for the 
other entities that are authorized to provide OVS and are not yet 
operational. Given that some entities authorized to provide OVS service 
have not yet begun to generate revenues, the Commission concludes that 
up to 44 OVS operators (those remaining) might qualify as small 
businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted 
herein.
    Satellite Master Antenna Television (SMATV) Systems, also known as 
Private Cable Operators (PCOs). SMATV systems or PCOs are video 
distribution facilities that use closed transmission paths without 
using any public right-of-way. They acquire video programming and 
distribute it via terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban multiple 
dwelling units such as apartments and condominiums, and commercial 
multiple tenant units such as hotels and office buildings. SMATV 
systems or PCOs are now included in the SBA's broad economic census 
category, ``Wired Telecommunications Carriers,'' which was developed 
for small wireline firms. Under this category, the SBA deems a wireline 
business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data 
for 2007 indicate that in that year there were 1,906 firms operating 
businesses as wired telecommunications carriers. Of that 1,906, 1,880 
operated with 999 or fewer employees, and 26 operated with 1,000 
employees or more.

[[Page 7626]]

Based on this data, we estimate that a majority of operators of SMATV/
PCO companies were small under the applicable SBA size standard.
    Under these new rules, cable operators that use QAM to modulate 
their signals need only comply with the SCTE 40 standard in lieu of 
testing digital signals. Cable operators will also be required to file 
Aeronautical Frequency Notifications with the Commission if they 
operate at a certain power level. These notifications are necessary to 
ensure that cable operators' signals do not interfere with aeronautical 
frequencies that are vital to airplane safety and navigation.
    The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, 
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in 
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four 
alternatives (among others): ``(1) the establishment of differing 
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the 
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small 
entities.''
    The Digital Cable Standards NPRM proposed to adopt rules analogous 
to the Commission's analog proof-of-performance rules which include a 
testing requirement, technical standards, testing methods, 
recordkeeping requirements, and procedures to resolve complaints about 
signal quality. The changes adopted in this Report and Order instead do 
not impose testing and reporting burdens for digital signals, 
substantially benefiting smaller businesses, and directly addressing 
the concerns raised by the comments filed in response to the IRFA. As 
noted above, because digital signals do not share in the pattern of 
technical problems which plagued analog services, a rigid periodic 
testing requirement is not necessary. This item will not impose a 
significant burden on small cable operators. All QAM-based cable 
operators already comply with the SCTE 40 standard for signal quality 
pursuant to the Commission's existing set-top box requirements, and 
absent complaints from subscribers about signal quality, under the 
Report and Order cable operators may rely on the standard to ensure 
proof-of-performance.
    Incorporation by reference: We are incorporating by reference 2 
standards in this rule: ANSI/SCTE 40 2016 and CTA-542-D.
    ANSI/SCTE 40 2016 sets relative channel power limits, carrier-to-
noise ratios, and adjacent-channel characteristics that reflect the 
minimum technical standards necessary to ensure that cable operators 
deliver quality QAM signals to their subscribers and is discussed more 
fully elsewhere in this preamble. The standard is freely available 
online at www.scte.org/SCTEDocs/Standards/SCTE%2040%202016.pdf, and 
therefore we conclude that it is reasonably available.
    CTA-542-D defines the frequency allocations for channel numbers on 
cable systems and is reasonably available for retail purchase from 
various sources and from the Consumer Technology Association directly 
at standards.cta.tech.
    Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of the Report 
and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to Congress pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy 
of the Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Report and Order and FRFA (or 
summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order in MB 
Docket No. 12-217 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).
    Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority found in 
Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 624, and 624A of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 
301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 544, and 544a, this Report and Order is 
adopted.
    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 in MB Docket No. 12-217, including the 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
    It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of this 
Report and Order in MB Docket No. 12-217 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).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

    Administrative practice and procedure, Cable television, Equal 
employment opportunity, Incorporation by reference, Political 
candidates, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends part 76 of title 47 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 76--MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE

0
1. 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
2. Amend Sec.  76.55 by revising the Note to paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  76.55   Definitions applicable to the must-carry rules.

* * * * *

    Note to Paragraph (d):  For the purposes of this section, for 
over-the-air broadcast, a good quality signal shall mean a signal 
level of either -45 dBm for analog VHF signals, -49 dBm for analog 
UHF signals, or -61 dBm for digital signals (at all channels) at the 
input terminals of the signal processing equipment.

* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  76.56 by revising paragraph (a)(1)(i) and the 
introductory text to paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.56   Signal carriage obligations.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Systems with 12 or fewer usable activated channels, as defined 
in Sec.  76.5(oo), shall be required to carry the signal of one such 
station;
* * * * *
    (b) Carriage of local commercial television stations. A cable 
television system shall carry local commercial broadcast television 
stations in accordance with the following provisions:
* * * * *

0
4. Revise Sec.  76.57(e) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.57   Channel positioning.

* * * * *
    (e) At the time a local commercial station elects must-carry status 
pursuant to Sec.  76.64, such station shall notify the cable system of 
its choice of channel position as specified in paragraphs (a), (b), and 
(d) of this section. A qualified NCE station shall notify the cable 
system of its choice of channel position when it requests carriage.
* * * * *

0
5. Revise Sec.  76.64(a) to read as follows

[[Page 7627]]

Sec.  76.64   Retransmission consent.

    (a) No multichannel video programming distributor shall retransmit 
the signal of any commercial broadcasting station without the express 
authority of the originating station, except as provided in paragraph 
(b) of this section.
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  76.105 by revising the introductory text to paragraph 
(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.105   Notifications.

* * * * *
    (b): Broadcasters entering into contracts which contain syndicated 
exclusivity protection shall notify affected cable systems within sixty 
calendar days of the signing of such a contract. A broadcaster shall be 
entitled to exclusivity protection beginning on the later of:
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  76.309 by revising the introductory text to paragraph 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.309   Customer service obligations.

* * * * *
    (c) Cable operators are subject to the following customer service 
standards:
* * * * *

0
8. Revise Sec.  76.601(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.601   Performance tests.

* * * * *
    (b) The operator of each cable television system that operates NTSC 
or similar channels shall conduct performance tests of the analog 
channels on that system at least twice each calendar year (at intervals 
not to exceed seven months), unless otherwise noted below. The 
performance tests shall be directed at determining the extent to which 
the system complies with all the technical standards set forth in Sec.  
76.605 and shall be as follows:
    (1) For cable television systems with 1,000 or more subscribers but 
with 12,500 or fewer subscribers, proof-of-performance tests conducted 
pursuant to this section shall include measurements taken at six (6) 
widely separated points. However, within each cable system, one 
additional test point shall be added for every additional 12,500 
subscribers or fraction thereof (e.g., 7 test points if 12,501 to 
25,000 subscribers; 8 test points if 25,001 to 37,500 subscribers, 
etc.). In addition, for technically integrated portions of cable 
systems that are not mechanically continuous (e.g., employing microwave 
connections), at least one test point will be required for each portion 
of the cable system served by a technically integrated hub. The proof-
of-performance test points chosen shall be balanced to represent all 
geographic areas served by the cable system. At least one-third of the 
test points shall be representative of subscriber terminals most 
distant from the system input and from each microwave receiver (if 
microwave transmissions are employed), in terms of cable length. The 
measurements may be taken at convenient monitoring points in the cable 
network provided that data shall be included to relate the measured 
performance of the system as would be viewed from a nearby subscriber 
terminal. An identification of the instruments, including the makes, 
model numbers, and the most recent date of calibration, a description 
of the procedures utilized, and a statement of the qualifications of 
the person performing the tests shall also be included.
    (2) Proof-of-performance tests to determine the extent to which a 
cable television system complies with the standards set forth in Sec.  
76.605(b)(3), (4), and (5) shall be made on each of the NTSC or similar 
video channels of that system. Unless otherwise noted, proof-of-
performance tests for all other standards in Sec.  76.605(b) shall be 
made on a minimum of five (5) channels for systems operating a total 
activated channel capacity of less than 550 MHz, and ten (10) channels 
for systems operating a total activated channel capacity of 550 MHz or 
greater. The channels selected for testing must be representative of 
all the channels within the cable television system.
    (i) The operator of each cable television system that operates NTSC 
or similar channels shall conduct semi-annual proof-of-performance 
tests of that system, to determine the extent to which the system 
complies with the technical standards set forth in Sec.  76.605(b)(4) 
as follows. The visual signal level on each channel shall be measured 
and recorded, along with the date and time of the measurement, once 
every six hours (at intervals of not less than five hours or no more 
than seven hours after the previous measurement), to include the 
warmest and the coldest times, during a 24-hour period in January or 
February and in July or August.
    (ii) The operator of each cable television system that operates 
NTSC or similar channels shall conduct triennial proof-of-performance 
tests of its system to determine the extent to which the system 
complies with the technical standards set forth in Sec.  76.605(b)(11).
* * * * *

0
9. Amend Sec.  76.602 by revising paragraphs (c) and (d)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  76.602   Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (c) The following materials are available from the Consumer 
Technology Association (formerly the Consumer Electronics Association), 
1919 S Eads St., Arlington, VA 22202; phone: 703-907-7600; web: 
standards.cta.tech/kwspub/published_docs/.
    (1) CTA-542-D, ``Cable Television Channel Identification Plan,'' 
June 2013, IBR approved for Sec.  76.605.
    (2) CEA-931-A, ``Remote Control Command Pass-through Standard for 
Home Networking,'' 2003, IBR approved for Sec.  76.640. (CEA-931-A is 
available through the document history of ``CTA-931'' from the reseller 
in paragraph (e)(2) of this section.)
    (d) * * *
    (3) ANSI/SCTE 40 2016, ``Digital Cable Network Interface 
Standard,'' copyright 2016, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  76.605, 76.640.
* * * * *

0
10. Revise Sec.  76.605 to read as follows


Sec.  76.605   Technical standards.

    (a) The following requirements apply to the performance of a cable 
television system as measured at the input to any terminal device with 
a matched impedance at the termination point or at the output of the 
modulating or processing equipment (generally the headend) of the cable 
television system or otherwise noted here or in ANSI/SCTE 40 2016. The 
requirements of paragraph (b) of this section are applicable to each 
NTSC or similar video downstream cable television channel in the 
system. Each cable system that uses QAM modulation to transport video 
programming shall adhere to ANSI/SCTE 40 2016 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  76.602). Cable television systems utilizing other 
technologies to distribute programming must respond to consumer 
complaints under paragraph (d) of this section.
    (b) For each NTSC or similar video downstream cable television 
channel in the system:
    (1) The cable television channels delivered to the subscriber's 
terminal shall be capable of being received and displayed by TV 
broadcast receivers used for off-the-air reception of TV broadcast 
signals, as authorized under

[[Page 7628]]

part 73 of this chapter; and cable television systems shall transmit 
signals to subscriber premises equipment on frequencies in accordance 
with the channel allocation plan set forth in CTA-542-D (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  76.602).
    (2) The aural center frequency of the aural carrier must be 4.5 MHz 
5 kHz above the frequency of the visual carrier at the 
output of the modulating or processing equipment of a cable television 
system, and at the subscriber terminal.
    (3) The visual signal level, across a terminating impedance which 
correctly matches the internal impedance of the cable system as viewed 
from the subscriber terminal, shall not be less than 1 millivolt across 
an internal impedance of 75 ohms (0 dBmV). Additionally, as measured at 
the end of a 30 meter (100 foot) cable drop that is connected to the 
subscriber tap, it shall not be less than 1.41 millivolts across an 
internal impedance of 75 ohms (+3 dBmV). (At other impedance values, 
the minimum visual signal level, as viewed from the subscriber 
terminal, shall be the square root of 0.0133 (Z) millivolts and, as 
measured at the end of a 30 meter (100 foot) cable drop that is 
connected to the subscriber tap, shall be 2 times the square root of 
0.00662(Z) millivolts, where Z is the appropriate impedance value.)
    (4) The visual signal level on each channel, as measured at the end 
of a 30 meter cable drop that is connected to the subscriber tap, shall 
not vary more than 8 decibels within any six-month interval, which must 
include four tests performed in six-hour increments during a 24-hour 
period in July or August and during a 24-hour period in January or 
February, and shall be maintained within:
    (i) 3 decibels (dB) of the visual signal level of any visual 
carrier within a 6 MHz nominal frequency separation;
    (ii) 10 dB of the visual signal level on any other channel on a 
cable television system of up to 300 MHz of cable distribution system 
upper frequency limit, with a 1 dB increase for each additional 100 MHz 
of cable distribution system upper frequency limit (e.g., 11 dB for a 
system at 301-400 MHz; 12 dB for a system at 401-500 MHz, etc.); and
    (iii) A maximum level such that signal degradation due to overload 
in the subscriber's receiver or terminal does not occur.
    (5) The rms voltage of the aural signal shall be maintained between 
10 and 17 decibels below the associated visual signal level. This 
requirement must be met both at the subscriber terminal and at the 
output of the modulating and processing equipment (generally the 
headend). For subscriber terminals that use equipment which modulate 
and remodulate the signal (e.g., baseband converters), the rms voltage 
of the aural signal shall be maintained between 6.5 and 17 decibels 
below the associated visual signal level at the subscriber terminal.
    (6) The amplitude characteristic shall be within a range of 2 decibels from 0.75 MHz to 5.0 MHz above the lower boundary 
frequency of the cable television channel, referenced to the average of 
the highest and lowest amplitudes within these frequency boundaries. 
The amplitude characteristic shall be measured at the subscriber 
terminal.
    (7) The ratio of RF visual signal level to system noise shall not 
be less than 43 decibels. For class I cable television channels, the 
requirements of this section are applicable only to:
    (i) Each signal which is delivered by a cable television system to 
subscribers within the predicted Grade B or noise-limited service 
contour, as appropriate, for that signal;
    (ii) Each signal which is first picked up within its predicted 
Grade B or noise-limited service contour, as appropriate;
    (iii) Each signal that is first received by the cable television 
system by direct video feed from a TV broadcast station, a low power TV 
station, or a TV translator station.
    (8) The ratio of visual signal level to the rms amplitude of any 
coherent disturbances such as intermodulation products, second and 
third order distortions or discrete-frequency interfering signals not 
operating on proper offset assignments shall be as follows:
    (i) The ratio of visual signal level to coherent disturbances shall 
not be less than 51 decibels for noncoherent channel cable television 
systems, when measured with modulated carriers and time averaged; and
    (ii) The ratio of visual signal level to coherent disturbances 
which are frequency-coincident with the visual carrier shall not be 
less than 47 decibels for coherent channel cable systems, when measured 
with modulated carriers and time averaged.
    (9) The terminal isolation provided to each subscriber terminal:
    (i) Shall not be less than 18 decibels. In lieu of periodic 
testing, the cable operator may use specifications provided by the 
manufacturer for the terminal isolation equipment to meet this 
standard; and
    (ii) Shall be sufficient to prevent reflections caused by open-
circuited or short-circuited subscriber terminals from producing 
visible picture impairments at any other subscriber terminal.
    (10) The peak-to-peak variation in visual signal level caused by 
undesired low frequency disturbances (hum or repetitive transients) 
generated within the system, or by inadequate low frequency response, 
shall not exceed 3 percent of the visual signal level. Measurements 
made on a single channel using a single unmodulated carrier may be used 
to demonstrate compliance with this parameter at each test location.
    (11) The following requirements apply to the performance of the 
cable television system as measured at the output of the modulating or 
processing equipment (generally the headend) of the system:
    (i) The chrominance-luminance delay inequality (or chroma delay), 
which is the change in delay time of the chrominance component of the 
signal relative to the luminance component, shall be within 170 
nanoseconds.
    (ii) The differential gain for the color subcarrier of the 
television signal, which is measured as the difference in amplitude 
between the largest and smallest segments of the chrominance signal 
(divided by the largest and expressed in percent), shall not exceed 
20%.
    (iii) The differential phase for the color subcarrier of the 
television signal which is measured as the largest phase difference in 
degrees between each segment of the chrominance signal and reference 
segment (the segment at the blanking level of 0 IRE), shall not exceed 
10 degrees.
    (c) As an exception to the general provision requiring measurements 
to be made at subscriber terminals, and without regard to the type of 
signals carried by the cable television system, signal leakage from a 
cable television system shall be measured in accordance with the 
procedures outlined in Sec.  76.609(h) and shall be limited as shown in 
table 1 to paragraph (c):

[[Page 7629]]



                        Table 1 to Paragraph (c)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Distance in
            Frequencies             Signal leakage limit    meters (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analog signals less than and        15 [micro]V/m.......              30
 including 54 MHz, and over 216
 MHz.
Digital signals less than and       13.1 [micro]V/m.....              30
 including 54 MHz, and over 216
 MHz.
Analog signals over 54 MHz up to    20 [micro]V/m.......               3
 and including 216 MHz.
Digital signals over 54 MHz up to   17.4 [micro]V/m.....               3
 and including 216 MHz.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) Cable television systems distributing signals by methods other 
than 6 MHz NTSC or similar analog channels or 6 MHz QAM or similar 
channels on conventional coaxial or hybrid fiber-coaxial cable systems 
and which, because of their basic design, cannot comply with one or 
more of the technical standards set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
this section, are permitted to operate without Commission approval, 
provided that the operators of those systems adhere to all other 
applicable Commission rules and respond to consumer and local 
franchising authorities regarding industry-standard technical operation 
as set forth in their local franchise agreements and consistent with 
Sec.  76.1713.

    Note 1: Local franchising authorities of systems serving fewer 
than 1,000 subscribers may adopt standards less stringent than those 
in Sec.  76.605(a) and (b). Any such agreement shall be reduced to 
writing and be associated with the system's proof-of-performance 
records.


    Note 2: For systems serving rural areas as defined in Sec.  
76.5, the system may negotiate with its local franchising authority 
for standards less stringent than those in Sec.  76.605(b)(3), (7), 
(8), (10) and (11). Any such agreement shall be reduced to writing 
and be associated with the system's proof-of-performance records.


    Note 3: The requirements of this section shall not apply to 
devices subject to the TV interface device rules under part 15 of 
this chapter.


    Note 4: Should subscriber complaints arise from a system failing 
to meet Sec.  76.605(b)(10), the cable operator will be required to 
remedy the complaint and perform test measurements on Sec.  
76.605(b)(10) containing the full number of channels as indicated in 
Sec.  76.601(b)(2) at the complaining subscriber's terminal. 
Further, should the problem be found to be system-wide, the 
Commission may order that the full number of channels as indicated 
in Sec.  76.601(b)(2) be tested at all required locations for future 
proof-of-performance tests.


    Note 5: No State or franchising authority may prohibit, 
condition, or restrict a cable system's use of any type of 
subscriber equipment or any transmission technology.


0
11. Revise Sec.  76.606 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.606  Closed captioning.

    (a) The operator of each cable television system shall not take any 
action to remove or alter closed captioning data contained on line 21 
of the vertical blanking interval.
    (b) The operator of each cable television system shall deliver 
intact closed captioning data contained on line 21 of the vertical 
blanking interval, as it arrives at the headend or from another 
origination source, to subscriber terminals and (when so delivered to 
the cable system) in a format that can be recovered and displayed by 
decoders meeting Sec.  79.101 of this chapter.

0
12. Revise Sec.  76.610 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.610  Operation in the frequency bands 108-137 MHz and 225-400 
MHz--scope of application.

    The provisions of Sec. Sec.  76.605(d), 76.611, 76.612, 76.613, 
76.614, 76.616, 76.617, 76.1803 and 76.1804 are applicable to all MVPDs 
(cable and non-cable) transmitting analog carriers or other signal 
components carried at an average power level equal to or greater than 
100 microwatts across a 25 kHz bandwidth in any 160 microsecond period 
or transmitting digital carriers or other signal components at an 
average power level of 75.85 microwatts across a 25 kHz bandwidth in 
any 160 microsecond period at any point in the cable distribution 
system in the frequency bands 108-137 and 225-400 MHz for any purpose. 
Exception: Non-cable MVPDs serving less than 1000 subscribers and less 
than 1,000 units do not have to comply with Sec.  76.1803.

0
13. Revise Sec.  76.611 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.611  Cable television basic signal leakage performance 
criteria.

    (a) No cable television system shall commence or provide service in 
the frequency bands 108-137 and 225-400 MHz unless such systems is in 
compliance with one of the following cable television basic signal 
leakage performance criteria:
    (1) Prior to carriage of signals in the aeronautical radio bands 
and at least once each calendar year, with no more than 12 months 
between successive tests thereafter, based on a sampling of at least 
75% of the cable strand, and including any portion of the cable system 
which are known to have or can reasonably be expected to have less 
leakage integrity than the average of the system, the cable operator 
demonstrates compliance with a cumulative signal leakage index by 
showing that 10 log I[infin] is equal to or less than 64 
using the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22FE18.000

    [thgr] is the fraction of the system cable length actually examined 
for leakage sources and is equal to the strand kilometers (strand 
miles) of plant tested divided by the total strand kilometers (strand 
miles) in the plant;
    Ei is the electric field strength in microvolts per 
meter ([micro]V/m) measured 3 meters from the leak i; and
    n is the number of leaks found of field strength equal to or 
greater than 50 [micro]V/m measured pursuant to Sec.  76.609(h).
    The sum is carried over all leaks i detected in the cable examined; 
or
    (2) Prior to carriage of signals in the aeronautical radio bands 
and at least once each calendar year, with no more than 12 months 
between successive tests thereafter, the cable operator demonstrates by 
measurement in the airspace that at no point does the field strength 
generated by the cable system exceed 10 microvolts per meter ([micro]V/
m) RMS at an altitude of 450 meters above the average terrain of the 
cable system. The measurement system (including the receiving antenna) 
shall be calibrated against a known field of 10 [micro]V/m RMS produced 
by a well characterized antenna consisting of orthogonal resonant 
dipoles, both parallel to and one quarter wavelength above the ground 
plane of a diameter of two meters or more at ground level. The dipoles 
shall have centers collocated and be excited 90 degrees apart. The 
half-power bandwidth of the detector shall be 25 kHz. If an 
aeronautical receiver is used for this purpose it shall meet the 
standards of the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RCTA) for 
aeronautical communications receivers. The aircraft antenna shall be 
horizontally polarized.

[[Page 7630]]

Calibration shall be made in the community unit or, if more than one, 
in any of the community units of the physical system within a 
reasonable time period to performing the measurements. If data is 
recorded digitally the 90th percentile level of points recorded over 
the cable system shall not exceed 10 [micro]V/m RMS as indicated above; 
if analog recordings is used the peak values of the curves, when 
smoothed according to good engineering practices, shall not exceed 10 
[micro]V/m RMS.
    (b) In paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section the unmodulated 
test signal used for analog leakage measurements on the cable plant 
shall--
    (1) Be within the VHF aeronautical band 108-137 MHz or any other 
frequency for which the results can be correlated to the VHF 
aeronautical band; and
    (2) Have an average power level equal to the greater of:
    (i) The peak envelope power level of the strongest NTSC or similar 
analog cable television signal on the system, or
    (ii) 1.2 dB greater than the average power level of the strongest 
QAM or similar digital cable television signal on the system.
    (c) In paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section, if a modulated 
test signal is used for analog leakage measurements, the test signal 
and detector technique must, when considered together, yield the same 
result as though an unmodulated test signal were used in conjunction 
with a detection technique which would yield the RMS value of said 
unmodulated carrier.
    (d) If a sampling of at least 75% of the cable strand (and 
including any portions of the cable system which are known to have or 
can reasonably be expected to have less leakage integrity than the 
average of the system) as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section 
cannot be obtained by the cable operator or is otherwise not reasonably 
feasible, the cable operator shall perform the airspace measurements 
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (e) Prior to providing service to any subscriber on a new section 
of cable plant, the operator shall show compliance with either:
    (1) The basic signal leakage criteria in accordance with paragraphs 
(a)(1) or (2) of this section for the entire plant in operation or
    (2) a showing shall be made indicating that no individual leak in 
the new section of the plant exceeds 20 [micro]V/m at 3 meters in 
accordance with Sec.  76.609 for analog signals or 17.4 [micro]V/m at 3 
meters for digital signals.
    (f) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, a cable operator 
shall be permitted to operate on any frequency which is offset pursuant 
to Sec.  76.612 in the frequency band 108-137 MHz for the purpose of 
demonstrating compliance with the cable television basic signal leakage 
performance criteria.

0
14. Revise the introductory text to Sec.  76.612 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.612   Cable television frequency separation standards.

    All cable television systems which operate analog NTSC or similar 
channels in the frequency bands 108-137 MHZ and 225-400 MHz shall 
comply with the following frequency separation standards for each NTSC 
or similar channel:
* * * * *

0
15. Revise Sec.  76.640(b)(1)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.640   Support for unidirectional digital cable products on 
digital cable systems.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) ANSI/SCTE 40 2016 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
76.602), provided however that the ``transit delay for most distant 
customer'' requirement in Table 4.3 is not mandatory.
* * * * *

0
16. Revise Sec.  76.1508(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1508   Network non-duplication.

    (a) Sections 76.92 through 76.95 shall apply to open video systems 
in accordance with the provisions contained in this section.
* * * * *

0
17. Revise Sec.  76.1509 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1509   Syndicated program exclusivity.

    (a) Sections 76.101 through 76.110 shall apply to open video 
systems in accordance with the provisions contained in this section.
    (b) Any provision of Sec.  76.101 that refers to a ``cable 
community unit'' shall apply to an open video system.
    (c) Any provision of Sec.  76.105 that refers to a ``cable system 
operator'' or ``cable television system operator'' shall apply to an 
open video system operator. Any provision of Sec.  76.105 that refers 
to a ``cable system'' or ``cable television system'' shall apply to an 
open video system except Sec.  76.105(c) which shall apply to an open 
video system operator. Open video system operators shall make all 
notifications and information regarding exercise of syndicated program 
exclusivity rights immediately available to all appropriate video 
programming provider on the system. An open video system operator shall 
not be subject to sanctions for any violation of the rules in 
Sec. Sec.  76.101 through 76.110 by an unaffiliated program supplier if 
the operator provided proper notices to the program supplier and 
subsequently took prompt steps to stop the distribution of the 
infringing program once it was notified of a violation.
    (d) Any provision of Sec.  76.106 that refers to a ``cable 
community'' shall apply to an open video system community. Any 
provision of Sec.  76.106 that refers to a ``cable community unit'' or 
``community unit'' shall apply to an open video system or that portion 
of an open video system that operates or will operate within a separate 
and distinct community or municipal entity (including unincorporated 
communities within unincorporated areas and including single, discrete 
unincorporated areas). Any provision of Sec. Sec.  76.106 through 
76.108 that refers to a ``cable system'' shall apply to an open video 
system.
    (e) Any provision of Sec.  76.109 that refers to ``cable 
television'' or a ``cable system'' shall apply to an open video system.
    (f) Any provision of Sec.  76.110 that refers to a ``community 
unit'' shall apply to an open video system or that portion of an open 
video system that is affected by this rule.

0
18. Revise Sec.  76.1510 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1510   Application of certain Title VI provisions.

    The following sections within part 76 shall also apply to open 
video systems: Sec. Sec.  76.71, 76.73, 76.75, 76.77, 76.79, 76.1702, 
and 76.1802 (Equal Employment Opportunity Requirements); Sec. Sec.  
76.503 and 76.504 (ownership restrictions); Sec.  76.981 (negative 
option billing); and Sec. Sec.  76.1300, 76.1301 and 76.1302 
(regulation of carriage agreements); Sec.  76.610 (operation in the 
frequency bands 108-137 and 225-400 MHz--scope of application provided, 
however, that these sections shall apply to open video systems only to 
the extent that they do not conflict with this subpart S. Section 631 
of the Communications Act (subscriber privacy) shall also apply to open 
video systems.

0
19. Revise Sec.  76.1601 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1601   Deletion or repositioning of broadcast signals.

    A cable operator shall provide written notice to any broadcast 
television

[[Page 7631]]

station at least 30 days prior to either deleting from carriage or 
repositioning that station. Such notification shall also be provided to 
subscribers of the cable system.

0
20. Amend Sec.  76.1602 by revising the introductory text to paragraph 
(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1602   Customer service--general information.

* * * * *
    (b) The cable operator shall provide written information on each of 
the following areas at the time of installation of service, at least 
annually to all subscribers, and at any time upon request:
* * * * *


Sec.  76.1610   [Amended]

0
21. Amend Sec.  76.1610 by removing paragraphs (f) and (g).

0
22. Revise Sec.  76.1701(d) to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1701   Political file.

* * * * *
    (d) Where origination cablecasting material is a political matter 
or matter involving the discussion of a controversial issue of public 
importance and a corporation, committee, association or other 
unincorporated group, or other entity is paying for or furnishing the 
matter, the system operator shall, in addition to making the 
announcement required by Sec.  76.1615, require that a list of the 
chief executive officers or members of the executive committee or of 
the board of directors of the corporation, committee, association or 
other unincorporated group, or other entity shall be made available for 
public inspection at the local office of the system. Such lists shall 
be kept and made available for two years.

0
23. Revise the introductory text to Sec.  76.1804 to read as follows:


Sec.  76.1804   Aeronautical frequencies notification: leakage 
monitoring (CLI).

    An MVPD shall notify the Commission before transmitting any digital 
signal with average power exceeding 10-\5\ watts across a 30 
kHz bandwidth in a 2.5 millisecond time period, or for other signal 
types, any carrier of other signal component with an average power 
level across a 25 kHz bandwidth in any 160 microsecond time period 
equal to or greater than 10-\4\ watts at any point in the 
cable distribution system on any new frequency or frequencies in the 
aeronautical radio frequency bands (108-137 MHz, 225-400 MHz). The 
notification shall be made on FCC Form 321. Such notification shall 
include:
* * * * *

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-03547 Filed 2-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P