Television Broadcasting Services Toledo, Ohio, 15181-15182 [2021-05442]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
418–0530 (VOICE), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
This document does not contain
information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any
proposed information collection burden
‘‘for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, do not apply to this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that all ex parte contacts are prohibited
from the time a notice of proposed
rulemaking is issued to the time the
matter is no longer subject to
Commission consideration or court
review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are,
however, exceptions to this prohibition,
which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a).
See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the
Commission’s rules for information
regarding the proper filing procedures
for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Television.
Federal Communications Commission.
Thomas Horan,
Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
Proposed Rule
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 73 as follows:
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303,
307, 309, 310, 334, 336, and 339.
2. In § 73.622(i), amend the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments
under Nebraska by revising the entry for
Superior, and adding, in alphabetical
order, an entry for York to read as
follows:
■
§ 73.622 Digital television table of
allotments.
*
*
*
*
(i) Post-Transition Table of DTV
Allotments.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
Community
*
*
Channel No.
*
*
Nebraska
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:45 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
*
Community
Channel No.
*
*
*
*
*
Superior .................... ....................................
York ...........................
24
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2021–04769 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 21–73; RM–11889; DA 21–
270; FR ID 17558]
Television Broadcasting Services
Toledo, Ohio
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Video Division has before
it a petition for rulemaking filed
November 27, 2020 (Petition) by
Dominion Broadcasting, Inc.
(Petitioner), the licensee of WLMB
(IND), channel 5, Toledo, Ohio (WLMB
or Station). The Petitioner requests the
substitution of channel 35 for channel 5
at Toledo, Ohio in the DTV Table of
Allotments.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be filed on or
before April 21, 2021 and reply
comments on or before May 6, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45
L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In
addition to filing comments with the
FCC, interested parties should serve
counsel for petitioner as follows: Joseph
C. Chautin, III, Esq., Hardy, Carey,
Chautin & Balkin, LLP, 1080 West
Causeway Approach, Mandeville, LA
70471.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shaun Maher, Video Division, Media
Bureau, at (202) 418–2324 or
Shaun.Maher@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No.
21–73; RM–11889; DA 21–270, adopted
March 4, 2021, and released March 4,
2021. The full text of this document is
available for download at https://
www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials
in accessible formats (braille, large
print, computer diskettes, or audio
recordings), please send an email to
FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Government Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (VOICE), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15181
This document does not contain
information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any
proposed information collection burden
‘‘for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, do not apply to this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that all ex parte contacts are prohibited
from the time a notice of proposed
rulemaking is issued to the time the
matter is no longer subject to
Commission consideration or court
review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are,
however, exceptions to this prohibition,
which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a).
See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the
Commission’s rules for information
regarding the proper filing procedures
for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.
In support of its channel substitution
request, the Petitioner states that, since
the Station transitioned to channel 5 in
2008 in conjunction with the
Commission’s digital television
transition, it has regularly received
complaints from viewers unable to
receive the Station’s over-the-air signal.
Petitioner states that these issues have
‘‘continued unabated’’ for twelve years.
Petitioner further states that it ‘‘has been
forced to constantly scramble to retain
viewers with a variety of methods, some
costly.’’ Petitioner maintains that these
propagation problems have put WLMB
at a distinct competitive disadvantage to
the other stations broadcasting in the
Toledo market. Petitioner states that the
Commission has long since recognized
that ‘‘VHF channels have certain
characteristics that have posed
challenges for their use in providing
digital television service’’ and that the
Station’s experience is no different.
To remedy its propagation problems,
Petitioner proposes substituting UHF
channel 35 for VHF channel 5.
Petitioner provides an Engineering
Statement that it claims confirms that,
with WLMB’s proposed parameters,
including a 375 kW ERP, channel 35 can
be substituted for channel 5 at Toledo,
Ohio, in compliance with the
Commission’s rules. Petitioner states
that the proposed facility would
continue to provide a principal
community contour completely
covering WLMB’s community of license
and would not cause impermissible
interference to any station.
Petitioner contends that the
Engineering Statement also confirms
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
15182
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
that WLMB’s channel 35 contour would
be fully contained within the Station’s
existing channel 5 contour and would
continue to reach what Petitioner
characterizes as a ‘‘substantial majority’’
of the population within the Station’s
current service area, including fully
covering the City of Toledo. Petitioner
concedes that an analysis using the
Commission’s TVStudy indicates that
WLMB’s move from channel 5 to
channel 35 would create a predicted
interference-free population loss of
735,018 persons. However, Petitioner
maintains, the majority of that
population is located in the densely
populated Detroit metropolitan area,
which is outside of the Toledo, Ohio
Nielsen Designated Market Area (DMA).
Furthermore, Petitioner continues,
when terrain limitations and other overthe-air television services are taken into
account, nearly all viewers predicted to
lose access to WLMB’s signal would
continue to be ‘‘well served’’ as they
would continue to have access to at
least five full power or Class A
television signals. Petitioner calculates
that only 388 people are predicted to
live in portions of a ‘‘very small new
loss area’’ that would not otherwise be
well-served. Petitioner asserts, however,
that even those viewers would not lose
access to their only over-the-air
television service, as they continue to
receive three full power or Class A
television signals.
Petitioner claims that the Commission
will approve a proposed channel
substitution that includes a loss of
service if the proposal is ‘‘supported by
a strong showing of countervailing
public interest,’’ such as offsetting
service gains. Given the persistent
feedback WLMB has received about
reception issues within the Station’s
core coverage area, Petitioner maintains
that any ‘‘nominal population loss’’ in
outlying areas of the station’s contour
would be more than outweighed by the
substantial improvement in the Station’s
actual over-the-air reception within its
community of license and in other core
portions of its service area. Petitioner
concludes that the proposed
substitution of channel 35 therefore
would serve the public interest by
giving Toledo-area residents greater,
more reliable access to WLMB’s free
over-the air signal, with few if any
viewers losing access to robust over-theair service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
We believe that Petitioner’s channel
substitution proposal warrants
consideration. Channel 35 can be
substituted for channel 5 at Toledo,
Ohio, as proposed, in compliance with
the principal community coverage
requirements of § 73.625(a) of the
Commission’s rules (rules), 18 at
coordinates 41–44–41 N and 084–01–06
W. In addition, we find that this
channel change meets the technical
requirements set forth in §§ 73.616 and
73.623 of the rules. Given its location,
we note that Petitioner’s proposal is
subject to coordination with Canada.
Although substituting channel 35 for
channel 5 would result in a loss of
service to approximately 735,018
persons, we agree with Petitioner that
the loss area is ‘‘well-served’’ by at least
five other television stations. Further,
although Petitioner’s proposal would
result in a loss of service to
approximately 388 people that would
not otherwise be ‘‘well-served,’’ we find
such a loss area to be de minimis.
Federal Communications Commission.
Thomas Horan,
Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
Proposed Rule
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 73 as follows:
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
2. In § 73.622(i), amend the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments
under Ohio by revising the entry for
Toledo to read as follows:
■
PO 00000
*
*
Channel No.
*
*
Ohio
*
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
*
*
[FR Doc. 2021–05442 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 21–57; RM–11882; DA 21–
166; FR ID 17556]
Television Broadcasting Services;
Savannah, Georgia; Correction
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
AGENCY:
The Federal Communications
Commission published a document in
the Federal Register of March 5, 2021,
concerning a petition for rulemaking
filed by Gray Television Licensee, LLC
(Gray) requesting the substitution of
channel 23 for channel 11 at Savannah,
Georgia in the DTV Table of Allotments.
The document contained the incorrect
address for counsel of petitioner.
DATES: March 22, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew Manley, Andrew.Manley@
fcc.gov, Media Bureau, (202) 418–0596.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In FR Doc. 2021–04635, in the
Federal Register of March 5, 2021, on
page 12898, in the third column, correct
the ADDRESS caption to read:
*
Dated: March 9, 2021.
Thomas Horan,
Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2021–05421 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
Frm 00049
*
Federal Communications
Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45
L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In
addition to filing comments with the
FCC, interested parties should serve
counsel for petitioner as follows: Joan
Stewart, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, 1776 K
Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.
*
Community
*
*
*
11, 13, *29, 35, 46,
49
ADDRESSES:
§ 73.622 Digital television table of
allotments.
*
*
*
*
Toledo .......................
Correction
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303,
307, 309, 310, 334, 336, 339.
*
*
(i) * * *
Channel No.
SUMMARY:
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Television.
*
Community
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 53 (Monday, March 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15181-15182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05442]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 21-73; RM-11889; DA 21-270; FR ID 17558]
Television Broadcasting Services Toledo, Ohio
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Video Division has before it a petition for rulemaking
filed November 27, 2020 (Petition) by Dominion Broadcasting, Inc.
(Petitioner), the licensee of WLMB (IND), channel 5, Toledo, Ohio (WLMB
or Station). The Petitioner requests the substitution of channel 35 for
channel 5 at Toledo, Ohio in the DTV Table of Allotments.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or before April 21, 2021 and reply
comments on or before May 6, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary,
45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments
with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for petitioner as
follows: Joseph C. Chautin, III, Esq., Hardy, Carey, Chautin & Balkin,
LLP, 1080 West Causeway Approach, Mandeville, LA 70471.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaun Maher, Video Division, Media
Bureau, at (202) 418-2324 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 21-73; RM-11889; DA 21-
270, adopted March 4, 2021, and released March 4, 2021. The full text
of this document is available for download at https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials in accessible formats (braille, large
print, computer diskettes, or audio recordings), please send an email
to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau at
(202) 418-0530 (VOICE), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
This document does not contain information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In
addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information
collection burden ``for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, do not apply to
this proceeding.
Members of the public should note that all ex parte contacts are
prohibited from the time a notice of proposed rulemaking is issued to
the time the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or
court review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, however, exceptions to this
prohibition, which can be found in Sec. 1.1204(a) of the Commission's
rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a).
See Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.420 of the Commission's rules for
information regarding the proper filing procedures for comments, 47 CFR
1.415 and 1.420.
In support of its channel substitution request, the Petitioner
states that, since the Station transitioned to channel 5 in 2008 in
conjunction with the Commission's digital television transition, it has
regularly received complaints from viewers unable to receive the
Station's over-the-air signal. Petitioner states that these issues have
``continued unabated'' for twelve years. Petitioner further states that
it ``has been forced to constantly scramble to retain viewers with a
variety of methods, some costly.'' Petitioner maintains that these
propagation problems have put WLMB at a distinct competitive
disadvantage to the other stations broadcasting in the Toledo market.
Petitioner states that the Commission has long since recognized that
``VHF channels have certain characteristics that have posed challenges
for their use in providing digital television service'' and that the
Station's experience is no different.
To remedy its propagation problems, Petitioner proposes
substituting UHF channel 35 for VHF channel 5. Petitioner provides an
Engineering Statement that it claims confirms that, with WLMB's
proposed parameters, including a 375 kW ERP, channel 35 can be
substituted for channel 5 at Toledo, Ohio, in compliance with the
Commission's rules. Petitioner states that the proposed facility would
continue to provide a principal community contour completely covering
WLMB's community of license and would not cause impermissible
interference to any station.
Petitioner contends that the Engineering Statement also confirms
[[Page 15182]]
that WLMB's channel 35 contour would be fully contained within the
Station's existing channel 5 contour and would continue to reach what
Petitioner characterizes as a ``substantial majority'' of the
population within the Station's current service area, including fully
covering the City of Toledo. Petitioner concedes that an analysis using
the Commission's TVStudy indicates that WLMB's move from channel 5 to
channel 35 would create a predicted interference-free population loss
of 735,018 persons. However, Petitioner maintains, the majority of that
population is located in the densely populated Detroit metropolitan
area, which is outside of the Toledo, Ohio Nielsen Designated Market
Area (DMA). Furthermore, Petitioner continues, when terrain limitations
and other over-the-air television services are taken into account,
nearly all viewers predicted to lose access to WLMB's signal would
continue to be ``well served'' as they would continue to have access to
at least five full power or Class A television signals. Petitioner
calculates that only 388 people are predicted to live in portions of a
``very small new loss area'' that would not otherwise be well-served.
Petitioner asserts, however, that even those viewers would not lose
access to their only over-the-air television service, as they continue
to receive three full power or Class A television signals.
Petitioner claims that the Commission will approve a proposed
channel substitution that includes a loss of service if the proposal is
``supported by a strong showing of countervailing public interest,''
such as offsetting service gains. Given the persistent feedback WLMB
has received about reception issues within the Station's core coverage
area, Petitioner maintains that any ``nominal population loss'' in
outlying areas of the station's contour would be more than outweighed
by the substantial improvement in the Station's actual over-the-air
reception within its community of license and in other core portions of
its service area. Petitioner concludes that the proposed substitution
of channel 35 therefore would serve the public interest by giving
Toledo-area residents greater, more reliable access to WLMB's free
over-the air signal, with few if any viewers losing access to robust
over-the-air service.
We believe that Petitioner's channel substitution proposal warrants
consideration. Channel 35 can be substituted for channel 5 at Toledo,
Ohio, as proposed, in compliance with the principal community coverage
requirements of Sec. 73.625(a) of the Commission's rules (rules), 18
at coordinates 41-44-41 N and 084-01-06 W. In addition, we find that
this channel change meets the technical requirements set forth in
Sec. Sec. 73.616 and 73.623 of the rules. Given its location, we note
that Petitioner's proposal is subject to coordination with Canada.
Although substituting channel 35 for channel 5 would result in a loss
of service to approximately 735,018 persons, we agree with Petitioner
that the loss area is ``well-served'' by at least five other television
stations. Further, although Petitioner's proposal would result in a
loss of service to approximately 388 people that would not otherwise be
``well-served,'' we find such a loss area to be de minimis.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Television.
Federal Communications Commission.
Thomas Horan,
Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
Proposed Rule
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows:
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICE
0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334,
336, 339.
0
2. In Sec. 73.622(i), amend the Post-Transition Table of DTV
Allotments under Ohio by revising the entry for Toledo to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.622 Digital television table of allotments.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community Channel No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Toledo.............................. 11, 13, *29, 35, 46, 49
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2021-05442 Filed 3-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
