Political Programming and Online Public File Requirements for Low Power Television Stations; Rules To Advance the Low Power Television, TV Translator and Class A Television Service, 53537-53561 [2024-13812]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53537-53561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13812]



[[Page 53537]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 11, 73, and 74

[MB Docket Nos. 24-147 and 24-148; FCC 24-65; FR ID 226295]


Political Programming and Online Public File Requirements for Low 
Power Television Stations; Rules To Advance the Low Power Television, 
TV Translator and Class A Television Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) seeks comment on revisions to our rules relating to the 
Low Power Television service (LPTV Service). The LPTV Service includes 
low power television (LPTV) stations as well as television translator 
(TV translator) stations and Class A TV stations (Class A). The 
Commission created the LPTV Service in 1982 to bring local television 
service to viewers ``otherwise unserved or underserved'' by existing 
full power service providers. Today, these stations are an established 
component of the nation's television system, delivering free over-the-
air TV service, including locally produced programming, to millions of 
viewers in rural and discrete urban communities. In light of changes to 
the LPTV Service over the last forty years, we invite comment on 
changes to our rules and policies to ensure that LPTV Service continues 
to flourish and serve the public interest.

DATES: Comments may be filed on or before July 29, 2024, and reply 
comments may be filed on or before August 26, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419,] interested parties may file comments and 
reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of 
this document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS). You may submit comments and reply 
comments, identified by MB Docket Nos. 24-147 and 24-148, by any of the 
following methods:
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the internet by accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by 
hand or messenger delivery, by commercial courier, or by the U.S. 
Postal Service. All filings must be addressed to the Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission.
     Hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for 
the Commission's Secretary are accepted between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. 
by the FCC's mailing contractor at 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis 
Junction, MD 20701. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of 
before entering the building.
     Commercial courier deliveries (any deliveries not by the 
U.S. Postal Service) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis 
Junction, MD 20701. Filings sent by U.S. Postal Service First-Class 
Mail, Priority Mail, and Priority Mail Express must be sent to 45 L 
Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
     People With Disabilities: To request materials in 
accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or 
call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Matthews, Media Bureau, Policy 
Division, at (202) 418-2154, or by email at [email protected]; Shaun 
Maher, Video Division, Media Bureau at (202) 418-2324, or by email at 
[email protected]; Mark Colombo, Video Division, Media Bureau at 
(202) 418-7611, or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 24-65, adopted on June 5, 2024 and 
released on June 10, 2024. The full text of this document is available 
for download at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-65A1.pdf. 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).
    Paperwork Reduction Act. This document proposes new or modified 
information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens and pursuant to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, invites the general 
public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on 
these information collection requirements. In addition, pursuant to the 
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on how we might further 
reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns 
with fewer than 25 employees.
    Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act. Consistent with 
the Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act, Public Law 118-
9, a summary of this document will be available on https://www.fcc.gov/proposed-rulemakings.

Synopsis

I. Background

    1. The LPTV Service was established over forty years ago as a 
secondary, niche service. At the time of its creation, the viability of 
the LPTV Service was not established and it was exempted from certain 
obligations applicable to other broadcasters, including certain 
recordkeeping and operating obligations. As the name suggests, stations 
in the LPTV Service have lower authorized power levels than full power 
TV stations. Because the LPTV Service operates at reduced power levels, 
the stations serve a much smaller geographic region than full power 
stations and can be fit into areas where a higher power station cannot 
be accommodated in the Table of TV Allotments or in accordance with 
section 307(b) of the Act. TV translator and Class A stations are 
technically equivalent to LPTV stations in most respects. While LPTV, 
TV translator, and Class A stations have many similarities under our 
rules, they are each a distinct class of broadcast television station, 
with differing rights and responsibilities.
    2. Currently, there are approximately 1,829 licensed LPTV stations. 
These stations operate in all states and territories. LPTV stations are 
permitted to both originate programming or retransmit, with permission, 
the signal of another TV station. LPTV stations are not limited in the 
amount of programming they may originate or rebroadcast, and have fewer 
operating obligations than full power television stations. LPTV 
stations completed the transition from analog to digital operations in 
2021.
    3. There are approximately 3,118 licensed TV translators, most 
operating in the western regions of the United States. With limited 
exception, TV translators are not permitted to originate programming 
and may only simultaneously retransmit the signal of another TV 
station, with permission. TV translator stations are intended to 
provide service to areas where direct reception of full-service 
broadcast stations is either not possible or unsatisfactory because of 
distance or intervening terrain obstructions.

[[Page 53538]]

Although TV translators are not limited to operation within the contour 
of the station or stations they rebroadcast, they may be used to 
provide service to terrain-obstructed areas within a full-service 
station's service area. TV translators are often used to deliver the 
only over-the-air television service available to rural communities.
    4. In addition, there are approximately 379 licensed Class A 
stations. In 2000, as instructed by Congress in the Community 
Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999 (CBPA), the Commission established 
the Class A television service. Class A stations are stations that 
operate at low power, like LPTV/TV translator stations, but are 
afforded primary interference protection status. The CBPA allowed 
certain qualifying LPTV stations to apply for Class A status. Class A 
stations completed a transition from analog to digital operations in 
2015. Although they are not a secondary service, Class A stations are 
still subject to the various LPTV/TV translator licensing and technical 
requirements found in part 74 of our rules.
    5. The LPTV Service has thrived since its creation in providing 
service to millions in local communities of all kinds across the 
nation. All such stations are currently required to operate in digital 
format. While some LPTV stations air ``niche'' programming, sometimes 
locally produced, to residents of specific ethnic, racial, or special 
interest communities, sometimes in foreign languages, others are 
affiliated with a television network, including the top four networks 
(ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC). In addition, while some LPTV stations remain 
small, independently owned stations, others are part of large station 
groups. In some areas unserved by any other television station, an LPTV 
station may be the only television station providing local news, 
weather, and public affairs programming. Even in some well-served 
markets, LPTV stations may provide the only service targeted to the 
specific interests of residents of discrete geographical communities 
within those markets. In many instances, these stations are significant 
enough voices in their communities to attract requests to carry 
political advertising and may also carry sponsored programming pursuant 
to time brokerage, local marketing agreements, or other agreements.

II. Discussion

    6. Given the maturation of the LPTV Service since its initiation, 
we seek comment in this proceeding about comprehensive updates to the 
regulations of the service. In sections A through C below we invite 
comment on whether we should require certain LPTV stations to maintain 
an online public inspection file (OPIF). In sections D through L we 
propose updates and amendments to our rules to address advances in the 
LPTV Service, update our existing rules to provide clarifications and 
resolve inconsistencies in our rules, prevent abuse of our licensing 
processes, create an equal playing field, and ensure that LPTV/TV 
translator stations are able to fully utilize the country's limited 
spectral resources to provide television services. Specifically, we 
propose and/or seek comment on whether to:
     Require certain LPTV stations to maintain an online public 
inspection file.
     Adopt procedures for certain LPTV stations to establish an 
online public inspection file.
     Specify in our rules that public inspection and political 
broadcasting requirements are applicable to all LPTV stations.
     Make other changes to Sec.  73.3526 of our rules to 
correct cross references and other inaccuracies relating to stations in 
the LPTV Service and commercial radio and TV stations and establish new 
reporting requirements for Class A and LPTV stations.
     Amend the method for calculating the maximum distance that 
a displaced or channel sharing station may move under the LPTV/TV 
translator displacement rule.
     Revise the LPTV/TV translator minor change rule to clarify 
the maximum distance that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations may 
move.
     Require that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations 
specify a community of license (COL) within their station's contour.
     Adopt minimum operating and defined minimum video program 
requirements for LPTV stations.
     Require that LPTV/TV translator stations seek authority to 
change designation between LPTV and TV translator status and require 
Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to maintain a call sign 
consistent with their class of service.
     Require use of a ``stringent'' or ``full-service'' 
emission mask for channel 14 Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to 
prevent interference to Land Mobile Radio (LMR) stations.
     Prohibit LPTV/TV translator station operations above TV 
channel 36.
     Remove the 30 day public notice comment period for 
displacement applications and clarify when an LPTV/TV translator 
station displaced by a full power station's channel substitution may 
apply for displacement.
     Clarify the existing displacement rule and interference 
thresholds for actual and predicted interference, and amend the 
definition of displacement to include displacement by LMR stations; by 
protected television facilities in Canada and Mexico; and due to 
interference to TV translator input channels.
     Codify other rule clarifications consistent with 
precedent, including the use of emission masks at Distributed 
Transmission System (DTS) transmitter sites; the maximum grid 
resolution permitted with interference analyses; and application of the 
part 73 ``program test authority'' rule to LPTV/TV translator stations.
     Remove duplicate definitions and re-letter the definitions 
remaining in the part 74 rules, and make other editorial, non-
substantive corrections to the part 11, 73, and 74 rules.

A. Requiring Certain LPTV Stations To Maintain an Online Public 
Inspection File

1. Existing Public File Requirements
    7. To provide the public with access to information about station 
operations, the Commission's rules have long required broadcast 
television and radio stations to maintain a physical public inspection 
file, including a political file, at their respective stations or 
headquarters and to place in the file records that provide information 
about station operations. The purpose of the public inspection file 
requirement is to ``make information to which the public already has a 
right more readily available, so that the public will be encouraged to 
play a more active part in dialogue with broadcast licensees.''
    8. The Commission promulgated its first political file rule in 
1938. That initial rule was essentially identical to our current 
political file regulation in its requirement that the file be available 
for public inspection and include both candidate requests for time and 
the disposition of those requests, including the ``charges made'' for 
the broadcast time. In 1965, following action by Congress to allow 
greater public participation in the broadcast licensing process, the 
Commission adopted a broader public inspection file rule to enable 
inspection of broadcast applications, reports, and related documents at 
a station's main studio. The Commission noted that Congress' actions 
``zealously guarded the rights of the general public to be informed'' 
and that the Commission's goal was to make

[[Page 53539]]

``practically accessible to the public information to which it is 
entitled.''
    9. In 2012, the Commission replaced the decades-old requirement 
that commercial and noncommercial television stations maintain public 
files at their main studios with a requirement to post most of the 
documents in those files to a central, online public file hosted by the 
Commission. In 2016, the Commission expanded the online public 
inspection file (OPIF) to include cable operators, Direct Broadcast 
Satellite (DBS) providers, broadcast radio licensees, and satellite 
radio (also referred to as ``Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service'' or 
``SDARS'') licensees. The Commission's goals were to modernize the 
procedures television broadcasters and other media entities use to 
inform the public about how they are serving their communities, make 
information concerning service more accessible to the public, and 
reduce the cost of compliance.
    10. Section 73.3526, the online public inspection file rule for 
commercial television and radio stations, requires ``[e]very permittee 
or licensee of an AM, FM, TV, or Class A TV station in the commercial 
broadcast services'' to maintain a public inspection file with material 
identified in the rule. LPTV stations are not currently subject to 
Sec.  73.3526. Among other required content, Sec.  73.3526(e) specifies 
that the public inspection file must include a copy of the station's 
current authorization, any application tendered for filing with the 
Commission together with related material, citizen agreements, contour 
maps, ownership reports and related materials, the political file, the 
Equal Employment Opportunity file, radio and television time brokerage 
agreements, must-carry or retransmission consent elections, radio and 
television joint sales agreements, shared service agreements, and 
foreign sponsorship disclosures. Section 73.3526(b) requires that 
television and radio station licensees or applicants subject to the 
rule place the contents of their public inspection file ``in the online 
public file hosted by the Commission.''
    11. When the Commission created the LPTV category of service in the 
LPTV Order, the Commission concluded that because the service was of 
undetermined viability and the stations are secondary, have small 
coverage areas, and are not required to serve a particular community or 
a specified coverage area, ``minimal regulation of low power television 
is in the public interest notwithstanding the fact that it is a 
broadcast service.'' Nevertheless, the Commission concluded that 
sections 312(a)(7) and (f) and 315 of the Act apply to LPTV stations. 
Section 312(a)(7) grants candidates for Federal office reasonable 
access to broadcasting stations. Section 315(a) states that, if a 
licensee permits one candidate for a public office to use its station, 
it must afford ``equal opportunities'' to all other candidates for that 
office to use the station. Section 315(b) provides that, during certain 
periods before an election, political candidates are entitled to ``the 
lowest unit charge of the station for the same class and amount of time 
for the same period.'' In addition, section 315(e) requires broadcast 
licensees to maintain and make available for public inspection certain 
records of requests to purchase broadcast time on the station. While 
LPTV stations must comply with the statutory requirements of sections 
312(a)(7) and 315, the Commission did not amend the political 
programming and political file rules that apply to LPTV when it last 
amended the political programming and political file rules that apply 
to full power and Class A stations.
    12. LPTV stations do have certain recordkeeping obligations aside 
from the political programming requirements described above. Section 
74.781 requires LPTV stations to ``maintain adequate station records'' 
and make them available to the Commission upon request. Section 
74.781(c) also requires that records ``shall be maintained for 
inspection,'' although that sentence mentions only translator stations. 
The records required to be maintained include the station 
authorization, official correspondence with the Commission, contracts, 
and ``other pertinent documents.'' In addition, Sec.  74.780 of the 
rules also contains some recordkeeping obligations. For example, LPTV 
stations must retain records of programming that is a ``political 
matter or matter involving the discussion of a controversial issue of 
public importance'' pursuant to Commission's sponsorship identification 
rules. In addition, LPTV stations must provide to the Commission upon 
request a copy of any network affiliation contract between the station 
and a national network.
    13. The implementation of the online file was a significant 
achievement in the Commission's ongoing efforts to improve public 
access to important station information. Since it was launched in 2012, 
more than 19,875,413 documents have been successfully uploaded into the 
online file, and the site receives 108,583 unique visitors every two 
weeks. Today, all full power and Class A television broadcast stations, 
cable operators, full-service radio broadcasters, DBS providers, and 
SDARS licensees have fully transitioned to OPIF. Despite initial 
concerns, NAB characterized the initial implementation of the online 
file as ``uneventful.'' The benefits of the online public file, versus 
maintaining files in main studios or other station offices, are clear. 
The evolution of the internet and the spread of broadband 
infrastructure have transformed the way society accesses information 
today. Prior to OPIF, reviewing a local public inspection file 
typically involved the substantial expense and inconvenience of 
traveling to the station. Maintaining station records instead in a 
centralized, online file permits review with a quick and essentially 
costless internet search and increases transparency to the public. OPIF 
also is consistent with the online document retention procedures used 
by most businesses today to increase efficiency, reduce storage costs, 
and improve access.
2. Application of Public File to Certain LPTV Stations
    14. As noted above, to ``zealously guard[ ] the rights of the 
general public to be informed'' and to make ``practically accessible to 
the public information to which it is entitled,'' full power and Class 
A television stations must comply with the public file rule. Yet LPTV 
stations, including stations that are leaders in their local markets 
and provide services comparable to those of full power and Class A 
stations, are currently required to make only certain records, 
including political file materials, available to the public and to 
provide certain records to the Commission upon request. We believe that 
the benefits of OPIF described above also would support requiring 
certain LPTV stations to comply with the same OPIF obligations as full 
power and Class A stations, and we seek comment on this issue. We seek 
comment on how, specifically, the public uses the public file to 
safeguard the value of the public airways. For instance, what 
information from broadcasters' public files does the public routinely 
seek? Has the trend toward consumption of video media not transmitted 
by broadcast licensees changed the informational or civic value of the 
public file--and, if so, how? Have any studies or other information-
gathering activity utilizing public file information been completed by 
civil society or public interest groups, and what do those studies or 
analyses reveal, if anything? Given the fact that LPTV is now an 
established service, the increased relevance of the LPTV Service 
generally, and the category of LPTV stations with top-four network

[[Page 53540]]

affiliations specifically, we seek comment on whether to require 
certain LPTV stations to comply with the online public inspection file 
requirements of Sec.  73.3526 of our rules. We invite comment on 
whether, for the reasons described below, we should modify our rules to 
extend the same OPIF requirements applicable to full power and Class A 
television stations to top-four network affiliated LPTV stations. We 
also invite comment on whether we should include LPTV stations 
affiliated with other national TV networks in the requirement to 
maintain an OPIF or, rather than tying any OPIF requirement for LPTV 
stations to network affiliation, if we should instead apply the OPIF 
requirement to LPTV stations that are among the top-four TV stations in 
each market based on the Nielsen ratings. Are there any other ways of 
differentiating among LPTV stations for purposes of imposing OPIF 
requirements?
    15. It has been over 40 years since the implementation of the LPTV 
Service. Today, there are almost 1,900 LPTV stations currently 
operating and providing important programming to the communities they 
serve. Many LPTV stations now serve as a significant source of 
programming in their communities, especially those that are network 
affiliates. Given these developments, has the LPTV Service become 
sufficiently well-established at this point in time to require that 
certain LPTV stations comply with the same or similar public file 
requirements that apply to full power and Class A TV stations? As LPTV 
stations have evolved to become, in some cases, a significant presence 
in their local markets, should such stations have a similar public 
inspection file obligation to ensure that this information is readily 
available to the public and the Commission? Is the Commission's prior 
justification for imposing minimal obligations on all LPTV stations now 
less compelling for certain categories of stations? Is there any reason 
not to extend OPIF obligations to at least some LPTV stations? Would 
the burden of requiring any category of LPTV station to comply with the 
same OPIF obligations as full power and Class A stations outweigh the 
benefits to the public? What are the costs associated with 
differentiating among LPTV stations for these purposes?
    16. Should stations with a top-four television network affiliation 
be subject to the OPIF requirements for the same reasons as full power 
and Class A stations--to zealously guard the rights of the general 
public to be informed and to make practically accessible to the public 
information to which it is entitled? Would expansion of the online 
public file to this category of LPTV stations improve public access to 
the files of affiliated stations by clearly identifying the records 
LPTV stations are required to make available to the public in the 
centralized, online file? In proposing to focus only on LPTV stations 
that are affiliated with a top-four television network, our goal is to 
limit the OPIF obligation to those LPTV stations that carry programming 
that is more likely to be widely viewed. Such stations have greater 
resources and thus can more easily address any implementation issues 
that may arise. Top-four network affiliates are generally the top-rated 
stations in their local markets. In addition, LPTV stations affiliated 
with a top-four network are more likely to be carried by multichannel 
video programming distributors (MVPDs) despite their status as low 
power stations, thereby extending their reach. We seek comment on the 
current extent of such MVPD carriage of non-class A LPTV stations. We 
note that the Commission has previously imposed different requirements 
on top-four network affiliates in light of the greater resources at 
their disposal and in recognition of the important role these stations 
play in providing local news and public affairs programming to their 
communities. We also believe that top-four network affiliated LPTV 
stations are more likely to have the kinds of materials required to be 
retained in OPIF, such as political file material, than LPTV stations 
that are not network affiliates. Thus, we believe that requiring these 
stations to comply with OPIF would make important information about the 
stations more easily accessible and provide the public the opportunity 
to ensure that these stations are properly discharging their duty to 
operate in the public interest. We seek comment on these issues.
    17. We also seek comment on what burdens the obligation to maintain 
an online public file would impose on LPTV stations with a top-four 
television network affiliation. Since LPTV stations currently must 
maintain certain records and provide these records to the Commission 
upon request, would there be a significant additional burden for LPTV 
stations with a top-four affiliation to maintain these same records in 
an OPIF file? We believe our proposal to use the online public file 
rather than paper files may result in modest costs upfront but will 
ultimately allow these stations to realize savings by no longer having 
to keep a local file on a going-forward basis. We note, as described 
above, that the OPIF for full power and Class A stations has been a 
significant achievement that improves transparency and defied initial 
concerns. We also believe that LPTV stations affiliated with a top-four 
television network can more easily address any implementation issues 
that may arise than other LPTV stations. We invite comment on these 
views.
    18. Should we extend OPIF requirements to LPTV stations that are 
affiliated with TV networks other than the top-four? If so, what other 
LPTV network affiliates should be included in the OPIF requirement? Is 
there any reason to exclude any LPTV network affiliate from OPIF 
obligations and, if so, what are those? As noted above, approximately 
15% of LPTV stations are affiliated with any network. How would 
inclusion of LPTV stations with other network affiliations alter the 
benefits and burdens of requiring certain LPTV stations to maintain an 
OPIF?
    19. Should we instead extend OPIF requirements to LPTV stations 
that are among the top-four television stations in each television 
market (Designated Market Area) based on ratings regardless of the 
station's network affiliation? If we were to adopt this approach, we 
propose to calculate whether a station is rated among the Top 4 by 
cross-reference to the Commission's media ownership rules defining the 
Top 4 criteria in Sec.  73.3555(b)(1) of our rules. We invite comment 
on this proposal and on any alternative methods of calculating whether 
a station is among the Top 4 rated stations in the market.
    20. Should we adopt some other measure for identifying those LPTV 
stations to which we should extend OPIF requirements? If we were to use 
an approach based on ratings rather than network affiliation, should we 
account for instances in which the LPTV station makes use of multicast 
streams, satellite stations, or translators? Should the ratings of 
these stations or streams be combined with the ratings of the primary 
station or stream to determine the station's ratings in the DMA? The 
Commission has previously expressed concern about using rankings or 
ratings, noting that those thresholds are subject to change and ``would 
be difficult to measure and administer, and would provide uncertainty 
to broadcasters, as they are not as able to predict or control 
ratings.'' Do those same concerns apply if we were to use rankings for 
purposes of determining which LPTV stations are subject to OPIF?
    21. If we focused on ratings, how would we account for stations 
that over time moved in or out of the top-four rating category? For 
instance, should we require any station that was rated within

[[Page 53541]]

the top-four in the market within a specific period of time, such as a 
two year period, to maintain an online public file? If a station is in 
the top-four for one month during a two-year period, should the station 
be required to maintain an OPIF for the entire two-year period? Should 
a different period of time apply and why? Should we recalculate the 
ratings/rankings at an established time each year for purposes of 
determining which LPTV stations are covered? Once a station achieves 
top-four status, should it be required to maintain an OPIF in 
perpetuity? That is, should we have a no backsliding requirement, such 
that once a station is covered under our OPIF requirements, it would 
remain covered? Would the fact that an LPTV station already incurred 
the modest cost of establishing an OPIF file, and the likely savings 
that would result from no longer having to maintain a local file, 
justify such a requirement? How would focusing on the top-four 
television stations in each television market alter the benefits and 
burdens of requiring a certain specified category of LPTV stations to 
maintain an OPIF?
    22. If we require certain LPTV stations to comply with the OPIF 
obligations in Sec.  73.3526 of our rules, we intend to implement 
efficiencies used in prior transition phases to OPIF in order to reduce 
the burden on these stations. Specifically, we propose to require that 
LPTV stations upload only those OPIF documents not otherwise filed with 
the Commission or available on the Commission's website. Any document 
or information required to be kept in the public file and that is 
required to be filed with the Commission electronically would be 
imported to the online public file and updated by the Commission. Given 
these measures to minimize the burdens, would the benefits of imposing 
an OPIF requirement on top-four network affiliated LPTV stations or any 
other category of LPTV stations, including improving public access to 
information about LPTV station operations, outweigh any costs?
    23. In addition, if we were to require certain LPTV stations to 
post political file information in OPIF, we propose to do so consistent 
with prior transitions. Specifically, we propose that LPTV licensees 
required to comply with OPIF must upload documents to the online 
political file only on a going-forward basis, and will not be required 
to upload their existing political files. Under this proposal, LPTV 
licensees could continue to maintain at the station those documents 
already in place in their political file at the time any new rules in 
this proceeding become effective, and in that way decrease the burden 
on LPTV licensees. We seek comment on this proposal. Should we permit 
LPTV stations that are not required to maintain an OPIF to voluntarily 
maintain an OPIF? Should we permit LPTV stations that will be obligated 
to maintain an OPIF to elect voluntarily to upload to OPIF existing 
political file material (i.e., material that they would otherwise not 
be required to upload under the proposed rules)?
    24. If we require certain LPTV stations to comply with the online 
public inspection file requirements of Sec.  73.3526 of our rules, 
those LPTV stations would be required to maintain in their OPIF, and 
thus make available for public inspection, the material identified in 
that rule, including a copy of the station's current authorization, any 
application tendered for filing with the Commission together with 
related material, citizen agreements, contour maps, ownership reports 
and related materials, the political file, the Equal Employment 
Opportunity file, must-carry or retransmission consent elections and 
foreign sponsorship disclosures. Pursuant to Sec.  73.3526(b), LPTV 
station licensees and applicants subject to the rule would be required 
to place the contents of their public inspection file ``in the online 
public file hosted by the Commission.'' Under our current rules, as 
discussed above, LPTV stations currently must maintain certain 
materials, including the current instrument of authorization, official 
correspondence with the FCC, contracts, permission for rebroadcasts, 
and ``other pertinent documents,'' and make them available to the 
Commission upon request. If certain LPTV stations are covered by OPIF, 
we also propose that those stations include in their online file the 
list required to be ``available for public inspection'' pursuant to 
Sec.  73.1212(e). Stations not required to maintain an OPIF would 
maintain the list as specified in Sec.  74.781(c). Is there any reason 
LPTV stations should be exempt from making the documents identified in 
Sec.  73.3526 available for public inspection in OPIF?
3. Public File Statutory Authority
    25. We note that we have broad authority under Title III of the Act 
to regulate radio communications, including classification of stations, 
prescription of the nature of services to be rendered, and the 
authority to establish the licensing procedures for broadcast stations 
when the public interest is found to be served. Section 303(b) provides 
that we have authority to ``prescribe the nature of the service'' 
offered by licensed stations. And section 303(r) of the Act provides 
that we have authority to ``[m]ake such rules and regulations and 
prescribe such restrictions and conditions, not inconsistent with law, 
as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of th[e] Act.'' We 
tentatively conclude that the OPIF obligations for LPTV stations on 
which we seek comment herein fall within this broad grant of authority 
because they would promote public understanding of various issues 
concerning the operation of the station and better inform the public 
about how the station is serving the community. Improving public access 
to information about certain LPTV stations also is consistent with the 
goal of sections 309 and 311 of the Act to permit public participation 
in broadcast licensing. In addition, section 315(e) of the Act requires 
licensees to make their political files available for public 
inspection. We believe that requiring LPTV licensees to make certain 
records available for public inspection in OPIF would further the Act's 
goal of ensuring that the public can access important information about 
the station and, with respect to political files, assist candidates and 
others seeking information about political advertisements being carried 
on the station. We invite comment on these views.

B. Procedures for LPTV Stations To Establish an OPIF

    26. If we were to require that certain LPTV stations comply with 
the OPIF requirements in Sec.  73.3526, such as those affiliated with a 
top-four TV network or those rated in the top four in a DMA or 
otherwise, we propose that the Media Bureau issue a Public Notice with 
an initial/draft list of those LPTV stations that fall within the 
affected group, based on generally accepted industry data. Licensees 
and other interested parties would be given a period of time to file 
comments on the initial/draft list in order to ensure it correctly 
identifies those LPTV stations subject to the OPIF requirement. The 
Media Bureau would subsequently issue a Public Notice including a final 
list of LPTV stations subject to the OPIF requirement in accordance 
with our rules and set a deadline by which each such LPTV station must 
begin to maintain the OPIF on the Commission's OPIF platform. Upon 
release of the Public Notice, the Commission would also send a copy of 
the public notice to the authorized representative of each station as 
reflected in the Commission's Licensing and Management System (LMS). We 
invite comment on this approach. We also seek comment on whether these

[[Page 53542]]

proposals appropriately accommodate small entities.
    27. If, after the Media Bureau issues a final list of LPTV stations 
that are subject to the OPIF requirement, an LPTV station's network 
affiliation or ratings ranking changes such that it would either become 
or no longer be covered by the OPIF rule, we propose that the LPTV 
station must notify the Commission within 10 days of the change in 
their affiliation or ranking. If we tie the OPIF requirement to LPTV 
stations ranked in the top-four in the market, such a change would be 
calculated based on rankings averaged over a 12-month period. 
Specifically, we propose that LPTV stations be required to send written 
notice to the Commission at an email address to be provided by the 
Media Bureau in the Public Notice that includes the final list of LPTV 
stations. The email would request either that an OPIF be created for 
the station or that the station be deleted from the list of LPTV 
stations with an OPIF requirement. The LPTV station would also be 
required to include the date the station's affiliation or ranking 
changed, and details of the station's change in circumstance (i.e., its 
new affiliation or ranking information). For LPTV stations with a new 
OPIF requirement, this filing would initiate the process of the 
Commission creating an OPIF for that LPTV station. The Media Bureau 
would by letter inform the station of the deadline by which the LPTV 
station must upload documents to its OPIF. We propose that stations 
with a new OPIF requirement be required to begin uploading all required 
OPIF documents within 60 days of the date of the letter. For LPTV 
stations that notify the Commission that they are no longer subject to 
the OPIF rule, the Media Bureau would provide written confirmation to 
the licensee by letter verifying they are no longer subject to the 
rule. The station would be required to upload a copy of the letter to 
its OPIF to ensure members of the public are aware it is no longer 
subject to the OPIF rule. The OPIF would remain publicly accessible for 
historical and investigatory purposes. We seek comment on these 
proposed procedures. How should the procedures change if we were to 
require stations to maintain an OPIF in perpetuity once they are 
required to do so? For example, in such a situation, would the LPTV 
station still have to notify the Commission about its change in rank/
affiliation? Would there be other requirements that would no longer be 
needed (e.g., no need to upload a letter discussing the station's 
change in rank/affiliation)?
    28. If we were to base an OPIF requirement on a station's market 
ranking should we adopt a waiting period before we impose an OPIF 
requirement on a station that becomes a top-four ranked station or 
drops out of the top-four to ensure that the change in market ranking 
is not short-lived? If so, how long should the waiting period be? As 
noted above, if we use an approach based on station ratings, that 
calculation is averaged over a 12-month period. If we adopt a waiting 
period, what should the waiting period be if we used an approach based 
on ratings? Should other procedures apply if we adopt a requirement 
based on a top-four market rating? If so why? We seek comment on these 
issues.

C. Recordkeeping and Political Broadcasting Obligations Applicable to 
All LPTV Stations

    29. As discussed above, LPTV stations are currently required by 
Sec.  74.781(a) of the rules to ``maintain adequate station records, 
including the current instrument of authorization, official 
correspondence with the FCC, contracts, permission for rebroadcasts, 
and other pertinent documents.'' Section 74.781(b) also requires LPTV 
stations to retain certain information about tower lighting. Section 
74.781(c) specifies a location where records must be ``maintained for 
inspection,'' but that sentence appears to refer only to translators, 
not LPTV stations. If we were to require a subset of LPTV stations to 
comply with Sec.  73.3526, we propose to revise Sec.  74.781(c) to 
reference the requirement that certain LPTV stations maintain an OPIF 
and to specify where LPTV stations must retain records not included in 
OPIF. Our proposed revisions to Sec.  74.781 would specify where 
records for LPTV stations, including the political file, can be 
accessed by the Commission and the public.
    30. In addition, we believe it is appropriate to require that all 
LPTV stations maintain records for public inspection, including those 
that do not have an OPIF requirement as a result of this proceeding. We 
interpret the requirement in Sec.  74.781(c) that station records be 
``maintained for inspection'' as mandating that such records be 
maintained for public inspection, as that paragraph separately mandates 
that station records also be made available to the Commission. While 
the inspection requirement in Sec.  74.781(c) could be read to apply 
only to translators, we note that requirement was adopted in 1975, 
prior to the establishment of the LPTV Service. As both Sec.  74.781(a) 
and (b) clearly apply to both translators and LPTV stations, we believe 
Sec.  74.781(c) is best read as not intended to limit the application 
of the inspection requirement solely to translators. Nothing in the 
Commission's order adding LPTV stations to Sec.  74.781 suggests that 
the Commission intended to carve out LPTV stations from the inspection 
requirement. Moreover, we tentatively conclude that it would serve the 
public interest to require LPTV stations maintain records for public 
inspection. Accordingly, we propose to revise the inspection 
requirement in Sec.  74.781(c) to clarify that the rule applies to both 
translators and LPTV stations. We seek comment on these proposed 
changes to Sec.  74.781(c). Is there any reason to exempt LPTV stations 
not subject to an OPIF requirement from a public inspection 
requirement? Is there any reason translators should be subject to a 
public inspection requirement and not LPTV stations?
    31. We also propose to update the list of political programming 
rules applicable to LPTV stations to align that list with existing and 
longstanding statutory requirements pursuant to sections 312 and 315 of 
the Act. Should we specify that LPTV stations are subject to Sec. Sec.  
73.1941 through 73.1944 of the Commission's rules, in addition to 
73.1940? These rules codify the statutory requirements of sections 
312(a)(7) and 315 of the Act, which apply to LPTV stations. The 
Commission originally adopted the rules in their current format in 
1991, and said that the rules were intended to ``accurately and closely 
reflect the language, intent, and requirements of the broadcasting 
portions'' of the Act and to provide ``detailed and practical advice'' 
to broadcasters, candidates, and the public regarding broadcasters' 
requirements and the rights afforded to candidates by the Act. The 
rules were also adopted ``to promote achievement of the Act's 
objectives while being responsive to the evolving sales practices of 
broadcast stations.'' We tentatively conclude that revising our rules 
to specify that the current versions of Sec. Sec.  73.1940 through 
73.1944 are applicable to LPTV stations would more accurately reflect 
the statutory obligations of LPTV stations and conform our requirements 
regarding LPTV stations to the requirements contained in sections 
312(a)(7) and 315 of the Act. We seek comment on this tentative 
conclusion.

D. Other Proposed Changes to Sec.  73.3526

    32. Finally, we propose to make other changes to Sec.  73.3526 of 
our rules to correct cross references and other inaccuracies, clarify 
existing

[[Page 53543]]

requirements, establish a filing frequency for Class A stations to 
certify they have met their ongoing eligibility requirements, and 
require Class A and LPTV stations to disclose time brokerage agreements 
(TBAs) and joint service agreements (JSAs).
    33. First, we propose to add to Sec.  73.3526(e)(11)(iii), which 
addresses the requirement to file an annual Children's Television 
Programming Report, a reference to Class A television stations. Class A 
stations have been required to prepare and file such reports since the 
Class A service was first established, but a reference to Class A was 
inadvertently omitted from this provision of the rules. Further, Sec.  
73.3526(a)(2) specifically requires Class A stations to comply with 
Sec.  73.3526(e)(11). Second, we propose to correct Sec.  73.3526(a)(2) 
to indicate that all commercial radio and television stations must 
comply with Sec.  73.3526(e)(19), which requires stations to retain in 
OPIF documentation sufficient to demonstrate that the station is in 
compliance with the requirements set forth in Sec.  73.1212(j)(7) of 
the Commission's rules. Third, we propose to correct Sec.  
73.3526(a)(2) to indicate that commercial radio and television stations 
must comply with Sec.  73.3526(e)(14) and (16). These provisions 
expressly apply to commercial radio and TV stations, but Sec.  
73.3526(a)(2) does not include a cross reference to both those 
provisions with respect to these stations. We seek comment on these 
rule clarifications.
    34. Third, we propose to correct Sec.  73.3526(a)(2) to indicate 
that Class A stations (including those established pursuant to the 
LPPA) must comply with Sec.  73.3526(e)(17), which requires that Class 
A stations include in OPIF documentation sufficient to demonstrate that 
the station is continuing to meet the ongoing Class A eligibility and 
service requirements set forth in Sec.  73.6001. In addition, we 
propose to establish how often Class A stations must provide such 
documentation and what type of documentation is required. As part of a 
Class A station's continuing eligibility obligation, it must broadcast 
a minimum of 18 hours per day and air an average of at least three 
hours per week of locally produced programming each quarter. Based on 
these ongoing eligibility requirements, we tentatively conclude that a 
quarterly filing is appropriate. All documentation would be required to 
be filed in a station's OPIF by the tenth day of the succeeding 
calendar quarter (e.g., January 10 for the quarter October-December; 
April 10 for the quarter January-March, etc.) and must be retained in 
the OPIF until final action has been taken on the station's next 
license renewal application. As to the type of documentation Class A 
stations may provide, the Media Bureau has generally accepted a 
certification of compliance as sufficient documentation. We propose to 
codify this requirement. However, given Congress' clear focus on 
locally produced programming, we seek comment on whether to require 
that Class A stations also include a list of locally produced 
programing sufficient to demonstrate that the station aired an average 
of three hours per week of locally produced programing each quarter. 
How burdensome would providing such a list be and what would that 
burden consist of? If we were to adopt such a requirement, what 
information should be included (e.g., time, date, duration, and title 
of each program aired)? We also propose that, like issue/programs 
lists, Class A stations be able to choose the format of the 
information. We seek comment on these clarifications and proposals.
    35. Finally, we propose to amend Sec.  73.3526(a)(2) to indicate 
that Class A and LPTV stations must retain in their OPIF any TBA or JSA 
relating to the station. Full power commercial TV stations and 
commercial radio stations are currently subject to this requirement, 
but our rules do not clearly apply this requirement to Class A 
stations. We propose to amend our rules to apply this requirement to 
both Class A and LPTV stations. The obligation to retain TBAs in 
particular was adopted to ``make it easier for the Commission and 
others to properly monitor time brokerage to ensure that licensees 
retain control of their stations and adhere to the Communications Act, 
Commission Rules and policies and the antitrust laws.'' The Commission 
has noted that this requirement would impose ``only a minimal burden on 
licensees.'' For similar reasons, the Commission also requires radio 
and television licensees to place copies of any JSAs in the public 
inspection file. The obligation to disclose these agreements in a 
station's public inspection file applies even if the agreement would 
not result in the arrangement being counted in determining the 
brokering licensee's compliance with local and national multiple 
ownership rules. We tentatively conclude that Class A and LPTV 
stations, like commercial television and radio stations, should also 
disclose such agreements for the same reasons disclosure is required 
for the commercial television and radio stations, and seek comment on 
this view. Is there any reason to exempt Class A and LPTV stations from 
this requirement? We seek comment on these proposals.

E. Revision to Rules Regarding Relocation of Facilities

1. Calculating Distance for Displaced and Channel Sharing Stations
    36. We next propose to modify our rules to resolve an inconsistency 
in calculating the distance a displaced or channel sharing station may 
relocate its facilities. The LPTV/TV translator rules contain limits on 
how far a station may relocate its transmission facilities. These 
limits were established to ensure that LPTV/TV translator modification 
applications for ``minor change'' remained just that. This was intended 
to ensure that stations continue to provide coverage to viewers that 
rely on their service, so that their viewers were not left behind when 
a station is displaced or chooses to relocate. Currently, a displaced 
LPTV/TV translator station may propose a change in transmitter site of 
not more than ``30 miles from the reference coordinates of the existing 
station's community of license.'' Further, the Commission's channel 
sharing rules apply this rule to Class A and LPTV/TV translator station 
relocations resulting from a proposed channel sharing arrangement. In 
contrast, a Class A or LPTV/TV translator station that is seeking to 
relocate its facility through a minor modification is limited to moving 
not greater than ``30 miles (48 kilometers) from the reference 
coordinates of the existing station's antenna location.''
    37. Thus, there is an inconsistency between the manner in which 
these rules calculate the distance of a proposed relocation. 
Furthermore, because Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations are not 
included in the Table of TV Allotments and not assigned a COL when 
licensed, using a station's COL as a reference point can be subject to 
abuse. As outlined later in this NPRM, although licensees may input a 
COL for their station in LMS, our rules do not currently have a 
procedure governing how Class A and LPTV/TV translator station may 
select a COL. As a result, a licensee can change the COL for their 
station in LMS at any time, and theoretically could specify a COL that 
has no association with the actual location of the station's 
facilities. This could undermine the purpose of the existing rule, to 
limit displacement and channel sharing relocations to 30 miles, if a 
station was to first modify its COL to designate a location that is 
within 30 miles of the location where a station wants to relocate the 
facility or channel

[[Page 53544]]

share, and then files a channel sharing or displacement application 
thereafter.
    38. To resolve the inconsistency, close a possible loophole in our 
rules, and harmonize our rules with respect to all Class A and LPTV/TV 
translator facility relocations, we propose to amend our displacement 
and channel sharing rules to eliminate the reference to a station's COL 
and incorporate the language of the minor change rule that measures 
distance from the reference coordinates of the ``existing station's 
antenna location.'' Even though later in this item we propose a process 
for Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to designate a COL, we 
believe that use of the COL as a reference point for displacement could 
continue to undermine the purpose of our displacement rule. Given the 
contour size and the hyper local nature of the LPTV Service, precision 
is necessary in order to stand by the original intent of the rule, 
which is to ensure minimized disruption to the existing audience when 
station facilities are relocated. Therefore, changing our rules to 
measure a station's proposed relocation based on the reference 
coordinates of its antenna location provides a better reference point 
for the station's service area. Conversely, measuring relocations based 
on the reference coordinates of a station's entire COL could continue 
to allow stations to potentially thwart the intent of the 30-mile 
relocation distance limit. We seek comment on this proposal.
2. The 30-Mile Distance Limit
    39. We also seek comment on clarifying the distance that Class A 
and LPTV/TV translator stations are allowed to move in a single minor 
modification application or a displacement application. As noted above, 
moves in either situation are currently limited to ``30 miles (48 
kilometers)'' in order to ensure continuity of service. For purposes of 
consistency and clarity, we propose to revise the rules that currently 
reference the 30-mile limit to state that a facility may not be 
relocated greater than 48.3 kilometers and to make clear that the 
distance calculation may not be ``rounded down.'' We understand that 
Media Bureau staff permitted stations proposing a relocation of up to 
30.49 miles to ``round-down'' the distance calculation to 30 miles to 
comply with the distance limitation. We propose to prohibit rounding of 
the distance calculation. Additionally, we propose to revise our rules 
to remove the imprecise miles-to-kilometers conversion and instead 
solely state that facility relocations may be not greater than 48.3 
kilometers. Any value over 48.3 kilometers, even by less than a tenth 
of a kilometer, will not be considered rule compliant. We seek comment 
on these proposals. While there exists the possibility of a waiver of 
our rules, should we establish exceptions in certain circumstances to 
allow stations to relocate their facility to a location more than 48.3 
kilometers from their reference coordinate. We seek comment on what 
exceptions, if any, should be set forth in our rules. Finally, we seek 
comment on whether to adopt a different distance limit for transmitter 
site relocations that are proposed in minor modification applications. 
Commenters proposing a different distance limit should explain why 
their proposed limit is more appropriate than the current 30-mile limit 
and how it aligns with our goal of ensuring existing viewers are not 
harmed.
3. Establishing Community of License Designations and Coverage 
Requirements
    40. We next propose to require that Class A and LPTV/TV translator 
stations specify a COL that is associated with their station's actual 
service area. As noted above, Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations 
are not allotted in the Table of TV Allotments. As a ``fill-in'' type 
service, their facilities can be authorized at any location so long as 
they do not cause interference to any other authorized television 
stations and as a secondary service their facilities can be easily 
displaced. As a result, the Commission has not previously imposed a 
rule or methodology for Class A or LPTV/TV translator stations to be 
formally assigned a COL. Because our existing rules do not provide a 
clear rule or methodology, the Media Bureau has been processing 
requests for changes in a Class A and LPTV/TV translator station's COL 
only when at least a portion of the proposed community is located 
within the station's protected contour.
    41. Formalizing the COL designation process and providing set 
standards for how a Class A and LPTV/TV translator station can select a 
COL will ensure that COL's listed in LMS and used by Stations actually 
reflects their service area. Although we believe that Class A and LPTV/
TV translator stations should continue to possess the flexibility to 
determine where best to locate their stations' facilities, we believe 
that stations should be required to designate a COL that has a 
connection with its station's operations. Further, this will also 
ensure that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations continue to utilize 
their COL to create a connection with the communities they in fact 
serve and allow viewers and the Commission to fully evaluate whether a 
station has been operating in the public interest convenience and 
necessity. We propose the following criteria be applied for all Class A 
and LPTV/TV translator stations when designating a COL. First, we 
tentatively conclude that all Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations 
should be required to designate a COL whose boundary at least partially 
overlaps with the station's ``protected service contour.'' We propose 
defining ``protected service contour'' as the protected contour 
provided for in Sec.  74.792 of our rules for LPTV/TV translator 
stations and Sec.  73.6010 of our rules for Class A stations. For 
purposes of determining whether a COL's boundary ``overlaps with a 
station's protected service contour,'' we propose to examine the legal 
boundary of the community that has been designated by any Federal, 
state, local, or tribal governmental entity. In designating a COL, a 
station would be required to provide a map demonstrating that the 
contour overlaps with the COL's legal boundary. Second, we tentatively 
conclude that any amount of overlap between the Station's protected 
service contour and legal boundary of its COL will be deemed sufficient 
for a station to designate a community as its COL. We tentatively find 
that this standard is appropriate given the relatively small size of 
the coverage area of many Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations. For 
that reason, we tentatively conclude a more stringent coverage 
requirement, such as a percentage of population or land area, may be 
unworkable and limit a station's COL options. We seek comment on our 
tentative conclusions and invite alternative proposals and standards by 
which Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations may select a COL.
    42. We also seek comment on whether we should require that a 
station serve the COL it has selected for a minimum period of time 
prior to being permitted to voluntarily change it. We propose to 
require Class A and LPTV/TV translator to serve their designated COL 
for at least one year before allowing them to change it. This will help 
ensure that when a station is licensed, it is not only intending to 
provide service to its community, but it in fact does so. Further, 
because a public interest benefit of designating a COL is to foster a 
connection between the station and the community it serves, we believe 
that such a restriction on community of license changes is justified. 
While stations in the LPTV Service are not in the Table of TV 
Allotments and are not held to our analysis under section 307(b) of the 
Act, we find that they still

[[Page 53545]]

must operate in the public interest, convenience, and necessity. As 
result, by designating a COL stations are committing to provide service 
to that area, in many cases unserved and underserved areas, for at 
least a certain period of time. We seek comment on this proposal and 
whether there should be any exceptions to the rule. For example, we 
tentatively find it would be appropriate to allow stations to modify 
their COL prior to the one year if the station is displaced or for 
circumstances beyond a station's control, such as natural disaster or 
other act of God, that cause the station to no longer be able to cover 
its COL. We propose not to consider independent business decisions or 
finances, as a basis for changing a COL within the one year period. 
What are other exceptions we should consider as a basis for a change in 
COL sooner than one year? Should exceptions be enumerated in our rules 
or, given the unique facts and circumstances that may be present in 
such cases, should we rely exclusively on our existing waiver standard?
    43. Finally, we propose that within six months of the effective 
date of any new COL rule we adopt in this proceeding, all Class A and 
LPTV/TV translators must designate a COL that is rule compliant. We 
propose to require all Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations 
designate a COL by filing an application for modification of license 
and pay the appropriate filing fee. Stations whose current COL meets 
the requirement of the new rule, should it be adopted, do not need to 
take any action. To help ease the initial transition, we propose to 
waive any application filing fee during this six month period for 
requests that solely seeking to designate a COL that is rule compliant. 
We seek comment on these proposals.

F. Establishing Minimum Operating Hours for LPTV Stations

    44. We propose adopting minimum operating hours for LPTV stations 
and seek comment on whether LPTV/TV translator stations should be 
required to certify with regard to their minimum operating hours on 
certain applications. Currently, LPTV stations are not subject to 
minimum required hours of operation and are not required to adhere to 
any regular schedule of operation. When the service was originally 
created, the Commission decided to not adopt such requirements given 
the undetermined viability of the service and because LPTV stations are 
low power, serve a small service area, have secondary interference 
protection status, and are not allotted in the Table of TV Allotments 
to serve a particular community or a specified coverage area. As a 
result, the Commission, at that time, concluded that ``minimal 
regulation of low power television is in the public interest, 
notwithstanding the fact that it is a broadcast service.''
    45. While there are no set minimum operating hours for LPTV 
stations, they are subject to specific rules if they discontinue 
operations for certain periods of time and remain silent for extended 
periods. Like all broadcast stations, an LPTV station that fails to 
operate for more than 10 days must notify the Commission that it is 
silent. If a station remains silent for more than 30 days, it must seek 
authority to remain silent. Unlike full power stations, failure of an 
LPTV station to operate for a period of 30 days or more, except for 
causes beyond the control of the licensee, shall be deemed evidence of 
discontinuation of operation and the license of the station may be 
cancelled at the discretion of the Commission. Finally, as with all 
broadcast stations, an LPTV station's license will automatically 
expire, as a matter of law, if the station fails to transmit a 
broadcast signal for any consecutive twelve- month period, 
notwithstanding any provision, term, or condition of the license to the 
contrary. Therefore, an LPTV station can operate briefly (for a few 
minutes or hours) every 30 days and avoid being deemed as having 
permanently discounted operations under Sec.  74.763(c) of our rules, 
or do the same once per year and avoid automatic expiration of its 
license under section 312(g) of the Act. In either instance, however, 
we tentatively find that the extremely minimal nature of those 
operations and the inherent lack of benefit to viewers from such 
minimal operations undermines the public interest benefit of the 
station and results in the underutilization of finite TV band spectrum. 
We tentatively find that these practices also threaten to undermine the 
value of the LPTV Service generally. We believe that adoption of 
minimum operating hours for LPTV stations will ensure that stations 
have a clear awareness of their public interest obligations to the 
viewers they have been licensed to serve, and prevent warehousing and 
underutilization of spectrum. We seek comment on this analysis.
    46. We propose that all LPTV stations be required to operate not 
less than 14 hours per calendar week. We tentatively conclude that 
requiring LPTV stations to operate a minimum of 14 hours per calendar 
week will not be a burdensome requirement. We seek comment on this 
proposal. While the Commission felt such a requirement was not 
necessary when the service was originally created, 40 years later we 
tentatively conclude that additional requirements are needed to ensure 
that all licensed stations are operating in the public interest by 
serving their viewers as intended. Other broadcast services have 
minimum operating requirements, including other low power, secondary 
services. For example, when the Commission was considering rules for 
its new Low Power FM (LPFM) radio service it noted that while it was 
``sympathetic with the position of some commenters that the market, not 
the Commission, should determine the hours a station operates,'' it 
ultimately concluded that adoption of a minimum operating requirement 
for LPFM stations would ensure effective utilization of channels. 
Despite LPFM being a secondary service, the Commission went on to find 
that such a requirement was not excessive and should not impose an 
inordinate burden on LPFM licensees. Similarly, we tentatively conclude 
that adopting a minimum operating requirement will achieve similar 
benefits to ensure the spectrum is being properly utilized without 
imposing significant costs or burdens on LPTV licensees. We seek 
comment on our tentative findings and conclusions.
    47. Commercial full power television stations are required to 
operate not less than 2 hours in each day of the week and not less than 
a total of 28 hours per calendar week. In addition, Class A stations 
are required to operate a minimum of 18 hours per day in order to 
maintain their Class A status. Our proposed minimum operating 
requirement for LPTV reflects half of the hours that commercial full 
power television stations are required to operate and a fraction of 
what Class A stations are required to broadcast. Our proposal also does 
not subject LPTV stations to a daily operational requirement in order 
to allow LPTV stations with non-traditional business hours, such as 
schools and religious institutions, more flexibility to operate their 
stations and serve their viewers. As a result, we propose to permit 
LPTV stations to operate at any time over the course of a seven day 
calendar week in order to provide flexibility and tailor their 
broadcast schedule to their local community as long as they operate not 
less than 14 hours per calendar week. We seek comment on this proposal.
    48. We also seek comment on whether alternative minimum operating 
hours or requirements would accomplish the same goals of ensuring 
stations serve the public interest and prevent limited spectral 
resources to lie fallow for all

[[Page 53546]]

but a few hours or days a year. For example, should we instead adopt a 
different weekly hourly requirement or instead a daily, monthly, or 
quarterly minimum operating requirement? If so, what is the appropriate 
amount of time we should require for any interval?
    49. Finally, we propose to require that all LPTV/TV translator 
licensees certify in any application for minor or major modification of 
a licensed facility and its license renewal application whether the 
station has complied with its minimum operating requirement over the 
course of the current license term, and if not provide an explanation 
for its failure and why grant of the pending application is in the 
public interest. We believe such a requirement will help ensure, in a 
minimally burdensome manner, that stations are complying with their 
minimum operating requirements and utilizing their licensed spectrum in 
the public interest We seek comment on this proposal. We also seek 
comment on what evidence (written or otherwise) should be deemed 
sufficient to support a license's operational certification if such 
certification is challenged. Should licensees be required to retain 
certain documents, such as written program logs to be made available at 
the request of the Commission or members of the public? And if so how 
long should licensees be required to retain such documentation?

G. Defining Minimum Programming Requirements

    50. To ensure that LPTV/TV translator stations are fully utilizing 
their spectrum to provide free over-the-air television service for 
their viewers, as intended by our rules and the Act, we propose to make 
LPTV/TV translator stations subject to the requirement currently in our 
part 73 rules that visual transmissions of test patterns, slides, or 
still pictures accompanied by unrelated aural transmissions may not be 
counted for purposes of complying with any minimum operating 
requirement. This part 73 requirement currently applies to both full 
power and Class A stations. We tentatively find that extending this 
requirement to LPTV/TV translator stations is consistent with the 
primary purpose of licensing broadcast television spectrum--the 
provision of video programming services to viewers. Adopting a 
requirement in our rules will provide clear guidance that LPTV/TV 
translator stations must provide video programming service to the 
public and utilize the spectrum for that purpose. We propose to apply 
this requirement only to programming aired on the station's primary 
stream and not apply it to a station's multicast stream. We seek 
comment on this proposal.

H. Class A, LPTV and TV Translator Station Designations and Call Signs

1. Changes Between LPTV and TV Translator Station Designations
    51. We propose to require that stations in the LPTV Service that 
seek to change their designation from LPTV to TV translator and vice 
versa, be required to seek Commission authority by way of a license 
modification application to make such a change. We further propose that 
stations in the LPTV service be allowed to change their station 
designation not more than once every 12 months. By proposing these 
rules, we aim to provide clarity to viewers and broadcasters concerning 
the station's service classification and what Commission rules and 
service obligations apply.
    52. Currently, if a station in the LPTV Service desires to change 
its designation between LPTV and TV translator (or vice versa), it 
requests this change by informally writing (by email or letter) Media 
Bureau staff, who in turn makes the classification change in the 
Commission's database. Stations in the LPTV Service can change their 
designation without limit and without any justification. For many years 
after the creation of the LPTV Service, the distinction between LPTV 
and TV translator stations was minimal and, therefore, no formal change 
process or standards were necessary. However, over the years the LPTV 
Service has changed and the Commission has adopted a number of 
regulations that have expanded the distinction between LPTV and TV 
translator stations. For example, beginning in 1994, the Commission 
created the Emergency Alert System (EAS), whereby broadcasters are 
required to transmit Presidential and other national alerts to the 
general public (and may transmit alerts originating at the state and 
local levels to the general public on a voluntary basis). EAS 
participants are required to submit EAS Test Reporting System (ETRS) 
filings in response to nationwide tests of the EAS (sometimes referred 
to as National Periodic Tests). LPTV stations are EAS participants and 
must submit the required ETRS filings; however, TV translator stations 
are not required to file them. In addition, in 2009, the Commission 
mandated that LPTV stations be subject to its rules requiring the 
filing of ownership reports. Because they do not originate programming, 
TV translator stations are not required to submit ownership reports.
    53. To enable the Commission and public to better track station 
classification changes and to provide rule compliance clarity for 
stations in the LPTV Service, we propose to formalize the redesignation 
process by requiring that LPTV Service designation changes be made 
through an application for license modification and that applicants be 
required to pay the requisite application filing fee. We also propose 
to limit LPTV Service designation changes to not more than once every 
12 months. We tentatively conclude such a limit would help ensure that 
stations are not attempting to switch classification from an LPTV to a 
TV translator in order to avoid regulatory burdens (i.e., ETRS filings 
or ownership reports) and then quickly switching back to obtain the 
benefits of being classified as an LPTV station (i.e., greater program 
origination ability). Are there any circumstances that stations should 
be permitted to change their designation more than once every 12 months 
and what type of showing should be required? We seek comment on these 
proposals.
    54. Furthermore, we propose to amend our rules to require that all 
stations with the LPTV designation, regardless of how the station is 
operated, must comply with our EAS rules. We also propose to clarify 
that a station formally designated in the Commission's database as a TV 
translator is not required to comply with our Part 11 requirements, 
such as installing EAS equipment or meeting related obligations like 
filing in ETRS, if it entirely rebroadcasts the programming--including 
all EAS--of a Primary Station. The EAS rules currently provide that 
``LPTV stations that operate as television broadcast translator 
stations, as defined in Sec.  74.701(b) of this chapter, are not 
required to comply with the requirements of this part.'' In light of 
our proposal to formalize the designation process and given the 
distinctions between LPTV and TV translator stations that have 
developed over the years, we believe it is appropriate to require any 
station that has chosen to be designated as an ``LPTV'' to comply with 
our existing EAS rules for LPTV stations. We believe that this change 
will also help ensure that all LPTV stations, when constructed, install 
the necessary EAS equipment as required and further the public interest 
by ensuring alerts are properly disseminated. Further, this change 
should not create any additional burdens given that under our proposed 
rule change any LPTV station that

[[Page 53547]]

entirely rebroadcasts the programming of a Primary Station may change 
its designation from LPTV to TV translator status to remain exempt from 
our EAS rules as they may be today. We seek comment on whether there is 
any practical reason to maintain the existing exception to the EAS rule 
for LPTV stations that operate as translator stations.
2. Call Sign Assignments
    55. TV Translator Stations. We propose to clarify in our rules that 
all TV translator stations must have an alphanumeric call sign 
comprised of a prefix consisting of the initial letter ``K'' or ``W 
``(based on the station's geographic location in relation to the 
Mississippi River), followed by the channel number assigned to the 
station and two additional letters, and a suffix consisting of the 
letter ``-D.'' Further, we propose that a station that converts from 
LPTV to TV translator status would have its four-letter LPTV call sign 
automatically modified by the Commission to an alphanumeric one that is 
consistent with our TV translator call sign rule. We tentatively 
conclude that this proposal is consistent with our existing rule which 
requires that TV translator stations maintain a uniform call sign 
methodology and will help viewers distinguish between TV translator 
stations and other classes of the TV service. We propose to 
automatically modify any call signs that do not comply with the 
proposed rule 30 days after the effective date of any Report and Order 
adopted in this proceeding. The 30-day period will allow licensees to 
inform their viewers of the impending call sign change. Given that TV 
translator stations are, with limited exception, restricted to 
rebroadcasting other station's programing we tentatively find TV 
translators do not have their own unique identity and 
``grandfathering'' existing call signs has no cognizable public 
interest benefit. We seek comment on this proposal and our tentative 
findings and conclusion.
    56. Class A and LPTV Stations. Further, we propose to require that 
all Class A and LPTV stations must have a four-letter call sign, with 
the suffix ``-LD'' for LPTV stations and ``-CD'' for Class A stations. 
Our current rule is permissive and states that ``[l]ow power television 
and Class A television stations may be assigned a four-letter prefix.'' 
It also permits LPTV stations to be assigned alphanumeric call signs 
just like TV translators. We tentatively conclude that in light of the 
regulatory and service distinctions between TV translator, LPTV, and 
Class A stations that it is appropriate to require that each service 
conform to its own call sign prefix and suffix. As an initial matter, 
we propose that any station that modifies its status from a TV 
translator to LPTV after the effective date of our proposed rule must 
submit a request for a new four-letter call sign prefix with the ``-
LD'' suffix in the Commission's call sign reservation system and pay 
the applicable fee. Further, we propose that the Commission will modify 
a Class A station's call sign that reverts from Class A status to LPTV 
to reflect its LPTV status by automatically changing its call sign 
suffix from ``-CD'' to ``-LD.'' The station will retain its current 
four-letter call sign prefix unless it conflicts with that of an 
existing LPTV station. In such a circumstance, the former Class A 
station will be required to modify its four-letter call sign prefix in 
the Commission's call sign reservation system. We also propose to 
provide all Class A and LPTV stations a period of 90 days from the 
effective date of our proposed rule to designate a four-letter call 
sign with the correct suffix. During this 90-day period, we propose to 
waive the fee associated with an initial call sign request by a station 
to modify its call sign in order to come into compliance with the 
proposed rule. We seek comment on this proposal.
    57. Alternatively, we seek comment on whether the Commission should 
``grandfather'' existing LPTV and Class A call signs that are not in 
compliance with our proposed new rule. As stations that originate 
programming, some LPTV and Class A stations may have developed an 
identity with viewers that involves their call sign. What are the 
specific public interest benefits we should consider when determining 
if existing Class A or LPTV stations should be permitted to retain 
their existing ``non-compliant'' call signs? Should stations be 
permitted to keep both their existing prefix and suffix? Should 
grandfathered call signs be transferrable and assignable? If we 
grandfather existing LPTV and Class A call signs, we tentatively 
conclude that only call signs of licensed stations on the release date 
of any Report and Order adopted in this proceeding will be eligible to 
be grandfathered. Further, we propose that any station with a 
grandfathered call sign will be required to bring its call sign into 
compliance with our proposed rule in the event it subsequently changes 
its classification (i.e., LPTV to TV translator or vice versa). We seek 
comment on these proposals and tentative conclusions.

I. Channel 14 Emission Masks

    58. In an effort to further reduce the potential for interference 
to LMR facilities in the 460-470 MHz band from Class A and LPTV/TV 
translator facilities operating on channel 14, we propose that new and 
modified channel 14 Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations (Channel 14 
LPTV Stations) must use a ``full service'' or ``stringent'' emission 
mask--a ``simple'' emission mask would be prohibited. We propose that a 
currently licensed Channel 14 LPTV Station would not be required to 
make a change to its existing licensed facility, and would only be 
required to implement filtering with a superior emission mask when 
proposing modifications to its facility that would change the station's 
current service contour or to address interference caused to an LMR 
facility.
    59. Interference to LMR facilities from adjacent channel 14 
television facilities (full power and low power) has long been a 
concern of the Commission, including most recently when Class A and 
LPTV/TV translator television stations converted to digital operations. 
The Commission's rules currently require that all Class A and LPTV/TV 
translators stations seeking new or modified facilities specify in 
their application for construction permit that the station will be 
constructed to confine out-of-channel emissions using one of the 
following emission masks: simple, stringent, or full-service. As the 
Commission pointed out in its Land Mobile Interference Order, instances 
of interference to LMR facilities from channel 14 television facilities 
``have been readily resolved by the installation of appropriate 
filters.'' So-called ``mask filters'' decrease out-of-band emissions to 
operations on adjacent channels, and in 2011, the Commission amended 
its rules to permit Class A and LPTV/translator stations to specify the 
use of masks previously implemented by full power television stations 
to prevent interference (``full-service masks''). Because of the 
potential for interference to LMR facilities, construction permits for 
Channel 14 LPTV Stations also contain a condition requiring permittees, 
to take measures during equipment tests to identify and substantially 
eliminate interference which may be caused to existing LMR facilities 
in the 460 to 470 MHz band. Further, Channel 14 LPTV Stations must 
provide documentation before operation that interference will not be 
caused to existing LMR facilities. A similar requirement applies to 
full power television stations and restrictions on a

[[Page 53548]]

channel 14 station's ability to commence program test authority.
    60. Although the three standard mask filters found in our rules do 
not always resolve LMR interference issues, we believe they remain the 
most effective means to prevent out-of-band emissions and interference 
to LMR facilities on 460-470 MHz. Because the stringent and full-
service masks are more restrictive than the simple mask and better 
decrease out-of-band emissions, their use for channel 14 stations would 
be expected to minimize potential interference to land mobile 
operations. Therefore, we propose to require all new or modified 
Channel 14 LPTV Stations to include the use of either stringent or 
full-service mask filtering unless the station is decreasing power or 
making a modification to its facilities that does not change its 
service contour. Based on our prior review, the cost difference between 
simple, stringent, and full-service mask filters is not substantial and 
because the filters are generally of similar physical size they should 
have similar installation costs. Specifically, we estimated in 2018 
that the cost of any given mask filter would be similar, with any cost 
difference being more heavily dependent on the power of the proposed 
facilities than on the specific type of emission mask. Therefore, we 
tentatively conclude that any increased cost of requiring Channel 14 
LPTV stations to include stringent or full-service mask filters would 
not be unduly burdensome. Further, we tentatively conclude that the 
burden caused by any potential slight increase in cost to Channel 14 
LPTV Stations would be outweighed by the benefits of reducing 
complaints from LMR stations, better protecting LMR stations from 
interference, and preventing wasted investments by Channel 14 LPTV 
Stations that, for example, install one type of mask filter and then 
determine that stricter mask filter is needed. We seek comment on this 
proposal and the burdens and benefits, including our cost assumptions, 
of requiring stringent or full-service mask filtering by Channel 14 
LPTV Stations.

J. Prohibition on Operations Above Channel 36

    61. We propose to prohibit any LPTV/TV translator stations from 
operating above channel 36 (out-of-core channels). As part of the 
Incentive Auction and repacking process, the Commission reallocated TV 
spectrum above channel 37 (614-698 MHz, the so-called ``600 MHz Band'') 
for use by wireless broadband providers and provided LPTV/TV translator 
stations that were displaced with an opportunity to file a displacement 
application to move their facilities to a new in-core channel. Further, 
the Commission prohibited new operations on out-of-core channels (i.e., 
above channel 36). However, in order to provide flexibility for out-of-
core stations to construct in-core channel displacement facilities, the 
Commission allowed out-of-core LPTV/TV translator stations to continue 
operating on their pre-auction channels until they were notified of 
likely interference by a new 600 MHz Band licensee.
    62. The Incentive Auction closed in 2017 and according to the 
Commission's records there are currently no LPTV/TV translator stations 
operating on out-of-core channel. Because all out-of-core stations 
appear to have received notice from a 600 MHz licensee, they are no 
longer able to operate on their licensed channels and are currently 
silent. Accordingly, we find that the flexibility previously afforded 
out-of-core stations is no longer necessary and we propose to amend our 
rules to prohibit television operation on all out-of-core channels. We 
propose that this prohibition would be effective upon publication in 
the Federal Register of a Report and Order adopting this proposed rule. 
Any license authorizing operation above channel 36 will be 
automatically canceled, without affirmative action by the Commission 
upon the effective date of our proposed rule. We seek comment on these 
proposals and tentative findings.

K. Additional Class A, LPTV, and TV Translator Rule Clarifications

    63. To further clarify certain Class A and LPTV/TV translator 
technical rules and policies, we propose changes to our rules as 
further described below. We propose these changes to promote clarity 
and ensure that all applicants are treated equally.
1. DTS Emission Masks
    64. We propose to require that all transmitters in a Class A or 
LPTV/TV translator station DTS facility must utilize the same emission 
mask and we tentatively conclude that all three emission masks found in 
our rules are permissible. A DTS network employs two or more 
transmission sites located within a station's service area, each using 
the same RF channel and synchronized to manage self-interference. To 
prevent interference to other facilities, all stations must specify an 
emission mask to be implemented with their DTS facilities. However, 
unlike full power television stations that may only use ``full 
service'' emission masks at each DTS site, the DTS rules adopted for 
Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations rules do not address whether a 
different type of emission mask could be employed or whether the same 
emission mask must be used at each DTS site. We tentatively conclude 
that allowing Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to specify 
different emission masks at each site prevents determination of the 
proper interference threshold. In order to ensure accurate interference 
calculations and reduce the potential for interference from Class A and 
LPTV/TV translator DTS facilities, we tentatively conclude that we 
should amend our rules to require that all Class A and LPTV DTS sites 
must utilize the same emission mask. We also tentatively conclude that 
we should clarify our rules to require that Class A and LPTV/TV 
translator DTS stations may use any of the emission masks permitted by 
our rules, so long as the same emission mask is used at all of their 
DTS transmitter sites. We seek comment on these proposals.
2. Interference Allowance
    65. We next propose to amend our rules to apply the same 
requirements to LPTV/TV translator stations as full-power and Class A 
TV stations when entering into an interference agreement. We also 
propose to allow stations operating pursuant to interference agreements 
or that are unilaterally accepting interference from another station, 
to maintain those agreed upon interference amounts when modifying a 
facility so long as applications involving stations with agreements 
remain compliant with those agreements. Currently, Class A and LPTV/TV 
translator stations are permitted to enter into interference agreements 
that supersede compliance with our interference protection standards, 
or to unilaterally accept incoming interference in excess of our 2% 
interference threshold. However, as our part 74 rules are currently 
written, when a Class A or LPTV/TV translator station agrees to accept 
interference above the 2% threshold (accepting station) from another 
Class A or LPTV/TV translator station (interfering station) and the 
interfering station subsequently modifies its facilities, the 
interfering station must reduce the level of interference to the 
accepting station to less than 2%. We tentatively conclude that this 
result is not justified when stations have either mutually agreed to, 
or a station has unilaterally agreed to accept, a certain level of 
interference.
    66. We tentatively conclude that LPTV/TV translator stations 
seeking to enter into an agreement to resolve interference concerns 
should be subject

[[Page 53549]]

to the same rules as Class A and full power stations. This includes 
entering into a signed written agreement that is submitted with the 
application and making clear that agreements may include the exchange 
of money or other consideration between entities. We believe codifying 
these parameters in our rules for LPTV/TV translators is appropriate to 
provide clarity to licensees and transparency to all. We seek comment 
on our tentative conclusion.
    67. We propose that a Class A and LPTV/TV translator station that 
has unilaterally agreed to accept interference from another station 
above the 2% interference threshold in our rules, will have the higher 
interference percentage taken into account when an application to 
modify a facility is considered. We also propose that stations subject 
to written interference agreements may also have the higher 
interference percentage taken into account, so long as doing so is 
consistent with the agreement. We propose that a station seeking to 
modify its facility would be required to demonstrate that no additional 
interference beyond what was previously caused or accepted will occur 
as a result of the proposed modification. We tentatively find that this 
revision will help maintain the status quo and preserve existing 
service based on agreed upon or unilaterally accepted interference 
levels. We seek comment on this proposal and our tentative conclusions.
3. Maximum Grid Resolution
    68. We propose to codify that a one square kilometer grid 
resolution should be the maximum permitted in evaluating the 
interference to Class A and LPTV/TV translator facilities. In the LPTV 
DTV First R&O, the Commission concluded that setting a one square 
kilometer maximum grid resolution was appropriate given that Class A 
and LPTV/TV translator facilities had smaller service areas and 
therefore required a finer grid resolution analysis. While the 
Commission announced this policy in the LPTV DTV First R&O, it was not 
codified. We note that many Class A and LPTV/TV translator applicants 
have been required to amend their showings after instead using a grid 
resolution of two square kilometers in their interference studies. For 
additional clarity, we propose to retain the one square kilometer 
maximum grid resolution adopted by the Commission in the LPTV DTV First 
R&O, and codify the requirement in our rules. We continue to believe 
that one square kilometer is the appropriate maximum grid resolution 
given Class A and LPTV/TV translators facilities' smaller service 
areas. We seek comment on this proposal and, if commenters believe that 
a different maximum grid resolution should be utilized, they should 
explain why it will provide a better basis for evaluating interference 
involving LPTV/TV translator stations.
4. Displacement Rule Revisions
    69. Displacement Public Notice Period. We propose updates to our 
displacement rule in order to minimize service disruptions. The 
displacement rule states that displacement applications: ``will be 
placed on public notice for a period of not less than 30 days to permit 
the filing of petitions to deny.'' This comment period was implemented 
because displacements require channel changes, which create a greater 
concern for interference. Yet, displacements are considered 
applications for minor change, and minor change applications are not 
subject to the 30-day period for interested parties to file a petition 
to deny. In practice, requiring a displaced LPTV/TV translator station 
to wait a full 30 days to receive action on its displacement 
application may result in loss of service to viewers or continued loss 
of service to viewers by delaying Commission action and thereby a 
station's ability to construct and commence operating from its 
displacement facility. To minimize service disruptions to the public, 
and expedite processing and construction, we propose eliminating the 30 
day public notice period for displacement applications found in Sec.  
74.787(a)(4) of our rules. While stations could seek special temporary 
authority in order to resume operation during the pendency of their 
displacement application, we aim to streamline this process in order to 
prevent as much disruption in service to the public as possible and 
provide certainty to stations to plan and make the necessary 
investments in their new facilities. We do not anticipate that this 
change will negatively impact the Commission's evaluation of objections 
to an application. Affected parties that want to oppose grant of a 
displacement application may still file an objection prior to 
Commission action and seek reconsideration up to 30 days after the 
grant. In addition, affected parties may report interference concerns 
raised by the displacement application at any time. We seek comment on 
these assumptions and the elimination of the 30-day public notice 
comment period for displacement applications.
    70. Displacements Caused by Full Power Channel Substitutions. We 
propose to define when an LPTV/TV translator station displaced by a 
full power station's channel substitution may apply for displacement. A 
full power television station seeking to change its operating channel 
must first submit a petition for rulemaking requesting that the Media 
Bureau change the Table of TV Allotments to reflect the new channel. If 
approved, the Media Bureau issues a Report and Order making the channel 
substitution and amending the Table of TV Allotments. It also orders 
the station to file an application for minor change in order to modify 
its facilities to the new channel. The Report and Order also includes a 
date upon which the channel change is effective, typically upon the 
date of publication of the Report and Order in the Federal Register.
    71. An LPTV/TV translator station that is displaced by a full power 
station's channel substitution must file a displacement application to 
move its channel. At the same time, the Commission's rules prohibit 
``contingent applications,'' meaning that we will not entertain 
applications that rely upon action on another pending application. 
Therefore, despite attempts by some LPTV/TV translator stations to file 
a displacement application prior to approval of the request to amend 
the Table of TV Allotments to reflect the channel substitution, 
Commission staff has declined to consider displacement applications 
that are based on a full power television station channel substitution 
until after the Report and Order granting the channel substitution and 
amending the Table of TV Allotments is effective. To provide clarity, 
we propose to amend our rules to specify that such displacement 
applications cannot be filed until the Report and Order granting the 
channel substitution and amending the Table of TV Allotments is 
effective. This will ensure that the station is in fact qualified for 
displacement and prevent stations from prematurely reserving spectrum 
on a contingent basis. We do not anticipate that this will unduly delay 
construction of the displacement facility or result in service 
interruptions as a station granted a channel substitution needs time to 
construct their new facility, thus providing a displaced station ample 
time to construct its own facility. Under our proposal, displacement 
applications that are filed before the Report and Order granting the 
channel substitution and amending the Table of TV Allotments is 
effective will be dismissed without prejudice. We seek comment on this 
proposal.

[[Page 53550]]

    72. Displacement Eligibility. We propose to enumerate in the 
displacement rule the precise circumstances that qualify LPTV/TV 
translator stations to seek a displacement channel. We also propose to 
permit displacement based on interference caused to a TV translator's 
input channel. Our current displacement rule states in part, that an 
LPTV/TV translator station ``which is causing or receiving interference 
or is predicted to cause or receive interference to or from an 
authorized TV broadcast station or allotment or other protected station 
or service, may at any time file a displacement relief application for 
change in channel . . . .'' We believe enumerating the circumstances 
where displacement applies will make it easier for licensees to 
determine if their station has in fact been displaced. Further, we 
propose revising the displacement rule to make clear that applicants 
must include an exhibit describing the specific cause of displacement 
in order to allow the Commission to more efficiently review 
displacement applications.
    73. First, we propose to clarify what is meant by ``causing or 
receiving interference.'' Under our proposal, this basis for 
displacement refers to actual interference received by a TV broadcast 
station (i.e., a full power television station) from an LPTV or TV 
translator station. While LPTV/TV translator stations are permitted to 
cause up to .5% predicted interference to a full power station, as a 
primary service full power stations are protected from actual 
interference within their noise limited service contour, even if the 
predicted interference is within the .5% threshold. In order for an 
LPTV/TV translator station to qualify for displacement relief based on 
actual interference caused to a TV broadcast station, we propose that 
there must be at least (1) a single report of actual interference 
received by a TV broadcast station within its community of license, or 
(2) multiple reports of actual interference to a TV broadcast station 
within its protected contour. We seek comment on how many reports of 
actual interference should be required in each instance and what 
information should be provided to validate such claims. For example, 
the Commission has established a set of criteria that includes a 
requirement for a minimum number of listener complaints that must be 
provided to demonstrate actual interference caused by FM translators, 
ranging from at least 6 to a cap of 25 depending on the population 
served. To provide certainty and clarity should a similar standard be 
adopted here? If so, what would be the appropriate threshold of viewer 
complaints? Should population within an impacted station's protected 
contour inform the number of complaints required? Is it appropriate for 
the threshold to be different if the interference is occurring within a 
TV broadcast station's community of license as opposed to elsewhere 
within its protected contour? What documentation should stations that 
claim they are displaced as a result of actual interference be required 
to file with their displacement application?
    74. Second, we propose to revise the displacement rule to clarify 
the levels of ``predicted'' interference that would qualify a station 
for a displacement channel. Under our revised rule, we propose that 
with respect to predicted interference ``caused'' to a TV broadcast 
station, the predicted interference would have to exceed the 0.5% de 
minimis interference threshold specified in Sec.  74.793(e) of our 
rules to qualify the station to file a displacement application. With 
respect to predicted interference ``received'' from a TV broadcast 
station, we propose that the predicted interference would have to 
exceed the 2% interference threshold specified in Sec.  74.793(h) of 
our rules to qualify the station to file a displacement application. We 
do not anticipate that this clarification of what is meant by 
``predicted'' interference will materially alter the scope and 
application of the existing displacement rule. We seek comment on this 
assumption. This proposal is not intended to expand or restrict 
displacement eligibility for predicted interference beyond the scope of 
the current rule. It is also not intended to modify our current 
interference thresholds (i.e., 0.5% or 2%). Instead, this proposal is 
intended to clarify what is meant by the word ``predicted'' in the 
context of our current interference thresholds. We seek comment on this 
proposal.
    75. Third, we propose to revise the displacement rule to make clear 
what ``other protected station or service'' means by adding two 
specific situations beyond interference to/from an authorized TV 
broadcast station that would qualify an LPTV/TV translator station to 
seek a displacement channel: (1) interference to LMR facilities; (2) 
interference to/from protected television facilities in Canada and 
Mexico. We tentatively find that it would be helpful to memorialize in 
our rules that such circumstances involving ``protected'' services 
would qualify an LPTV/TV translator station for displacement.
    76. Finally, we propose to add interference caused to a TV 
translator input channel as a basis for displacement. TV translators 
serve areas that would otherwise be unable to receive television 
service and are often found in rural and mountainous areas. Translator 
input channels provide TV translators a means to receive the 
programming that they are translating and would otherwise likely not be 
available over-the-air to the viewers they serve. While translator 
inputs are not ``protected services,'' we tentatively conclude it is in 
the public interest to protect these channels from interference given 
their often critical role in enabling TV translators to serve their 
viewers.
    77. Enumerating these circumstances within the displacement rule 
will make it clearer for licensees to know when displacement relief is 
warranted. We seek comment on these proposals and whether there are 
other situations involving interference being caused or received by 
LPTV/TV translator stations to ``other protected services,'' or that 
otherwise would serve the public interest, that we should consider 
permitting as a basis for displacement.
5. Program Test Authority Rule for LPTV/TV Translators
    78. We propose to make the Commission's part 73 ``program test 
authority'' (PTA) rule applicable to LPTV/TV translator stations. 
Currently, full power and Class A stations, with certain exceptions, 
may begin operating under PTA after completion of a facility provided 
that an application for license to cover is filed within ten days of 
commencing operations. A similar rule does not exist in the part 74 
rules for LPTV/TV translator stations. The purpose of this change is to 
make clear that LPTV/TV translator stations, with limited exception, 
have the same flexibility to begin operating automatically pursuant to 
program authority, while also making clear that they are required to 
submit an application for license after completing construction and 
within ten days of commencing PTA. We seek comment on this proposed 
revision.

L. Part 73 and 74 Ministerial Rule Corrections

    79. We propose a few minor editorial changes to our rules as a 
result of inadvertent oversights in in the 2022 Part 74 Order and 2023 
Part 73 Order. We also propose to reorganize Sec.  74.780 to better 
reflect which part 73 rules are applicable to both LPTV and TV 
translator stations and which are applicable only to LPTV stations. We 
seek comment on these proposed minor revisions.
    80. Part 74 Rule Corrections. In the Commission's 2022 Part 74 
Order, the

[[Page 53551]]

Commission updated its part 74 rules for LPTV/TV translator stations to 
reflect the current operating environment, including the termination of 
analog operations. However, the 2022 Part 74 Order inadvertently left 
in place a duplicate definition of low power TV station that exists in 
both Sec.  74.701(f) and (k) and a duplicate definition of television 
broadcast translator station that exists in both Sec.  74.701(a) and 
(j). We propose to remove the respective duplicate definitions in Sec.  
74.701 and re-lettering the remaining paragraphs as (a) through (g). 
Additionally, the Commission concluded that because LPTV/TV translators 
have completed their transition from analog to digital operations, 
there is no need to differentiate between digital and analog in the 
rules. Accordingly, for the aforementioned reasons, we propose to 
remove the remaining instances of the word ``digital'' from Sec.  
74.720, a rule which was added in a rulemaking that had not yet taken 
effect at the time the 2022 Part 74 Order was adopted. Finally, we 
propose to eliminate the words ``analog'' and ``digital'' as they 
relate to LPTV operation from Sec. Sec.  11.11(a) and (b), 11.51(e), 
and 11.61 in accordance with actions taken in the 2022 Part 74 Order 
removing such references.
    81. Reorganization of Section 74.780. Throughout this item, we 
propose to add requirements applicable to LPTV stations. Section 74.780 
contains a list of broadcast regulations applicable to both TV 
translators and LPTV stations. In order to make those requirements 
easier to locate, we propose to reorganize the requirements into 
paragraphs of the rule and group them based on the service(s) each 
paragraph is applicable to, separating those rules that are applicable 
to TV translators and LPTVs from those rules that are applicable to 
LPTV stations only. In addition, we propose to remove the cross-
reference to Sec.  73.1692 found in the current Sec.  74.780 since that 
section was previously removed from the rules. We seek comment on these 
proposals.
    82. Part 73 Rule Corrections. In the Commission's 2023 Part 73 
Report and Order, the Commission reorganized and streamlined its rules 
in recognition of the completion of the digital television transition 
and subsequent Incentive Auction and repack. However, a cross-reference 
to Sec.  73.685 in Sec.  73.7003 was inadvertently overlooked and not 
updated to reflect the new location of the rule, which is Sec.  73.618. 
We propose to update this cross-reference to point to the new location 
of the cross-referenced rule. We also propose to correct two other 
oversights in Sec.  73.7003. The reference in paragraph (b)(4) to the 
``Grade B'' contour should be replaced with a reference to the ``NLSC'' 
because Grade B refers to analog service, which no longer exists and 
NLSC is the correct contour. Also an internal cross-reference in 
paragraph (c)(5)(ii) incorrectly refers to a non-existent paragraph and 
should instead reference paragraph (c)(5)(i) and we propose that 
correction. We also propose to replace a reference to ``DTV'' in Sec.  
73.619(b)(1) with ``TV'' consistent with other similar replacements in 
the 2023 Part 73 Report and Order. The Commission also updated the part 
73 rules to provide accurate information about current Commission forms 
and filing procedures, but did not update the reference to Forms 301 
and 340 in Sec.  73.625(c)(4)(i) or Form 302-CA in Sec.  73.6002(a)(2). 
We propose to update these references to indicate the correct forms--
Form 2100 Schedule 301-AM and Form 2100 Schedule F, respectively. 
Finally, after Federal Register publication, a few minor typographical 
mistakes were found in the updated part 73 rules, as adopted. In Sec.  
73.2080(f)(3), there are four instances of a struck ``s'' at the end of 
the word ``Form'' which was inadvertent and should be removed, and in 
Sec.  73.4060(a), the citation has a struck ``4'' in it which should be 
removed. We seek comment on these proposals.

M. Cost/Benefit Analysis

    83. We seek comment on the benefits and costs associated with 
adopting the proposals set forth in this NPRM. We seek comment on any 
benefits to the public and to industry through adoption of our 
proposals. We also seek comment on any potential costs that would be 
imposed on licensees, regulatees, and the public if we adopt the 
proposals contained in this NPRM. Comments should be accompanied by 
specific data and analysis supporting claimed costs and benefits.

N. Digital Equity and Inclusion

    84. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to advance 
digital equity for all, including people of color, persons with 
disabilities, persons who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who 
are or have been historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely 
affected by persistent poverty or inequality, invites comment on any 
equity-related considerations and benefits (if any) that may be 
associated with the proposals and issues discussed herein. 
Specifically, we seek comment on how our proposals may promote or 
inhibit advances in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as 
well the scope of the Commission's relevant legal authority.

III. Procedural Matters

    85. Ex Parte Rules--Permit-But-Disclose. The proceeding this NPRM 
initiates shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in 
accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex 
parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a 
memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days 
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the 
Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations 
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list 
all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at 
which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data 
presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the 
presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data 
or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, 
memoranda, or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may 
provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior 
comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page 
and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in 
lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to 
Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex 
parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). 
In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has 
made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte 
presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, 
and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic 
comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed 
in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). 
Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the 
Commission's ex parte rules.
    86. Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 
1980, as amended (RFA), requires that an agency prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis for notice and comment rulemakings, unless the 
agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.'' Accordingly, we have prepared an Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning the possible/

[[Page 53552]]

potential impact of the rule and policy changes contained in this NPRM. 
The IRFA is set forth in Appendix B. The Commission invites the general 
public, in particular small businesses, to comment on the IRFA. 
Comments must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM 
indicated on the first page of this document and must have a separate 
and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA.
    87. OPEN Government Data Act. The OPEN Government Data Act, 
requires agencies to make ``public data assets'' available under an 
open license and as ``open Government data assets,'' i.e., in machine-
readable, open format, unencumbered by use restrictions other than 
intellectual property rights, and based on an open standard that is 
maintained by a standards organization. This requirement is to be 
implemented ``in accordance with guidance by the Director'' of the OMB.
    88. We tentatively conclude that requiring certain LPTV licensees 
to maintain an OPIF would not create ``data assets'' as defined in 44 
U.S.C. 3502(17). A ``data asset'' is ``a collection of data elements or 
data sets that may be grouped together,'' and ``data'' as ``recorded 
information, regardless of form or the media on which the data is 
recorded.'' The documents required to be maintained in an OPIF reflect 
unstructured information that is generally not systematically arranged 
in a table or database, and as such cannot readily be meaningfully 
grouped together. We tentatively conclude, therefore, that, in the 
absence of a standardized collection form, our requirement to maintain 
an OPIF is not subject to the requirements of the OPEN Government Data 
Act. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.

IV. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    89. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) has 
prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning 
the possible significant economic impact on small entities by the 
policies and rules proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM). Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments 
must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the 
deadlines for comments in the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of 
the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or 
summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    90. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on a number of 
proposals concerning changes to its rules and policies for the Low 
Power Television Service (LPTV Service). The LPTV Service includes low 
power television (LPTV), television translator (TV translator) and 
Class A television stations. The Commission believes now is an 
appropriate time to evaluate changes to its rules and policies in order 
to ensure that stations in the LPTV Service continue to flourish and 
serve the public interest of providing local television service to 
unserved or underserved viewers.
    91. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should update its 
recordkeeping requirements to require LPTV stations affiliated with a 
top-four national television network (ABC, CBS, NBC, or Fox) to comply 
with the same online public inspection file (OPIF) requirements that 
apply to full power and Class A television stations. The Commission 
seeks comment on whether to include other LPTV network affiliates in 
the requirement to maintain an OPIF or, rather than tying any OPIF 
requirement for LPTV stations to network affiliation, or whether we 
should instead apply the OPIF requirement to the top-four LPTV stations 
in each market based on the Nielsen ratings. The Commission propose to 
update certain broadcasting rules that are applicable to all LPTV 
stations to identify more clearly where records can be accessed.
    92. The NPRM also proposes changes to the Commission's rules and 
policies to help stations in the LPTV Service to be better prepared for 
future operations and enhance the LPTV Service overall. Many of the 
proposals would also affect Class A television (Class A) stations, 
therefore, comment is also sought from these stations. To resolve 
certain rule uncertainties and ensure that Class A and LPTV/TV 
translator stations are operating to their fullest potential and that 
licensees are not warehousing spectrum, the Commission proposes and 
seeks comment on a number of proposals including whether to:
     Require certain LPTV stations to maintain an online public 
inspection file.
     Adopt procedures for certain LPTV stations to establish an 
online public inspection file.
     Specify in our rules that public inspection and political 
broadcasting requirements are applicable to all LPTV stations.
     Make other changes to Sec.  73.3526 of our rules to 
correct cross references and other inaccuracies relating to stations in 
the LPTV Service and commercial radio and TV stations and establish new 
reporting requirements for Class A and LPTV stations.
     Amend the method for calculating the maximum distance that 
a displaced or channel sharing station may move under the LPTV/TV 
translator displacement rule.
     Revise the LPTV/TV translator minor change rule to clarify 
the maximum distance that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations may 
move.
     Require that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations 
specify a community of license (COL) within their station's contour.
     Adopt minimum operating and defined minimum video program 
requirements for LPTV stations.
     Require that LPTV/TV translator stations seek authority to 
change designation between LPTV and TV translator status and require 
Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to maintain a call sign 
consistent with their class of service.
     Require use of a ``stringent'' or ``full-service'' 
emission mask for channel 14 Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations to 
prevent interference to Land Mobile Radio (LMR) stations.
     Prohibit LPTV/TV translator station operations above TV 
channel 36.
     Remove the 30 day public notice comment period for 
displacement applications and clarify when an LPTV/TV translator 
station displaced by a full power station's channel substitution may 
apply for displacement.
     Clarify the existing displacement rule and interference 
thresholds for actual and predicted interference, and amend the 
definition of displacement to include displacement by LMR stations; by 
protected television facilities in Canada and Mexico; and due to 
interference to TV translator input channels.
     Codify other rule clarifications consistent with 
precedent, including the use of emission masks at Distributed 
Transmission System (DTS) transmitter sites; the maximum grid 
resolution permitted with interference analyses; and application of the 
part 73 ``program test authority'' rule to LPTV/TV translator stations.
     Remove duplicate definitions and re-letter the definitions 
remaining in the part 74 rules, and make other editorial, non-
substantive corrections to the part 11, 73, and 74 rules.

[[Page 53553]]

B. Legal Basis

    93. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2, 
4(i), 4(j), 303, 307, 309, 311, 312, and 315 of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(j), 303, 307, 309, 
311, 312, 315.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    94. 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 SBA. Below, we 
provide a description of such small entities, as well as an estimate of 
the number of such small entities, where feasible.
    95. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the 
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly 
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size 
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory 
flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small Business 
Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small business 
is an independent business having fewer than 500 employees. These types 
of small businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United 
States, which translates to 33.2 million businesses.
    96. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000 
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for 
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2022, there were 
approximately 530,109 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting 
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data 
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
    97. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2022 Census of Governments indicate there were 
90,837 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general purpose 
governments and special purpose governments in the United States. Of 
this number, there were 36,845 general purpose governments (county, 
municipal, and town or township) with populations of less than 50,000 
and 11,879 special purpose governments (independent school districts) 
with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on 
the 2022 U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least 
48,724 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental 
jurisdictions.''
    98. Television Broadcasting. This industry is comprised of 
``establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with 
sound.'' These establishments operate television broadcast studios and 
facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the 
public. These establishments also produce or transmit visual 
programming to affiliated broadcast television stations, which in turn 
broadcast the programs to the public on a predetermined schedule. 
Programming may originate in their own studio, from an affiliated 
network, or from external sources. The SBA small business size standard 
for this industry classifies businesses having $41.5 million or less in 
annual receipts as small. 2017 U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that 
744 firms in this industry operated for the entire year. Of that 
number, 657 firms had revenue of less than $25,000,000. Based on this 
data we estimate that the majority of television broadcasters are small 
entities under the SBA small business size standard.
    99. As of March 31, 2024, there were 1,382 licensed commercial 
television stations. Of this total, 1,263 stations (or 91.4%) had 
revenues of $41.5 million or less in 2022, according to Commission 
staff review of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro Television 
Database (BIA) on April 4, 2024, and therefore these licensees qualify 
as small entities under the SBA definition. In addition, the Commission 
estimates as of March 31, 2024, there were 383 licensed noncommercial 
educational (NCE) television stations, 379 Class A TV stations, 1,829 
LPTV stations and 3,118 TV translator stations. The Commission, 
however, does not compile and otherwise does not have access to 
financial information for these television broadcast stations that 
would permit it to determine how many of these stations qualify as 
small entities under the SBA small business size standard. 
Nevertheless, given the SBA's large annual receipts threshold for this 
industry and the nature of these television station licensees, we 
presume that all of these entities qualify as small entities under the 
above SBA small business size standard.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    100. The NPRM proposes new reporting, recordkeeping, and other 
compliance requirements for Class A, LPTV and TV translator stations, 
many of which include small entities. Although, the Commission cannot, 
at present, determine whether small entities will have to hire 
professionals to implement and comply with the NPRM's proposed 
requirements, nor can it quantify the cost of compliance for small 
entities, we expect that the approaches we propose will have minimal 
cost implications for impacted entities because many of these 
requirements are part of existing reporting processes for these 
entities.
    101. The proposed changes to our rules and policies are designed to 
ensure that LPTV service continues to serve the public interest. This 
includes updates to our recordkeeping requirements for LPTV stations 
that will centralize those records in an online public inspection file 
(OPIF) to make that information more easily accessible to the public 
while, at the same time, minimizing existing burdens associated with 
compliance. The NPRM seeks comment on whether to require that licensees 
of LPTV stations affiliated with a top-four TV network comply with 
Sec.  73.3526 of the Commission's rules, which would require them to 
maintain certain records in the Commission's OPIF. We also invite 
comment on whether we should include other LPTV network affiliates in 
the requirement to maintain an OPIF. In addition, rather than tying any 
OPIF requirement for LPTV stations to network affiliation, we invite 
comment on whether we should instead apply the OPIF requirement to the 
top-four LPTV stations in each market based on the Nielsen ratings. 
Transitioning these LPTV stations to the online public file would 
improve public access to certain station records.

[[Page 53554]]

    102. The NPRM also proposes to update the list of political 
programming rules applicable to LPTV stations to align with existing 
and longstanding statutory requirements, and to revise Sec.  74.781 of 
our rules to require that LPTV stations without an OPIF requirement 
maintain documents for public inspection. In addition, we propose to 
make other changes to Sec.  73.3526 of our rules to correct cross 
references and other inaccuracies, clarify existing requirements, 
establish a filing frequency for Class A stations to certify they have 
met their ongoing eligibility requirements, and require Class A and 
LPTV stations to disclose time brokerage agreements (TBAs) and joint 
service agreements (JSAs).
    103. We propose requiring that LPTV and TV translator stations file 
an application for modification of license in order to change their 
community of license. Existing FCC Forms 2100 Schedule D (LPTV/TV 
translator) and F (Class A) will be used for this proposed requirement 
and no changes to the Forms are anticipated except for the burden 
estimates for the existing collections for these Forms. We also propose 
that LPTV/TV translator stations certify in applications for minor 
change or license that they are in compliance with any minimum 
operating requirements adopted in this proceeding. Existing FCC Form 
2100 Schedule C and D would be modified and used for this requirement.
    104. The NPRM proposes to require that LPTV/TV translator stations 
that seek to change their designation from LPTV to TV translator and 
vice versa, be required to seek formal authority to make this change. 
Existing FCC Form 2100 Schedule D would be used for this proposed 
requirement and no changes to the Form are anticipated except for the 
burden estimates for the existing collection for this Form. Finally, 
the NPRM proposes minimum operating hours of no less than 14 hours per 
week for LPTV stations.
    105. The NPRM also proposes minimum operating hours of no less than 
14 hours per week for LPTV stations. We anticipate the information we 
receive in comments including where requested, cost and benefit 
analyses, will help the Commission identify and evaluate relevant 
compliance matters for small entities, including compliance costs and 
other burdens that may result from the proposals and inquiries we make 
in the NPRM.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered

    106. 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 small entities.''
    107. The Commission proposes a number of alternatives that may have 
a significant impact on small entities. The NPRM seeks comment on 
whether to require LPTV stations affiliated with a top-four TV network 
to comply with section 73.3526 of the Commission's rules, which 
requires stations to maintain certain records for public inspection in 
the Commission's OPIF database. By limiting the proposal to LPTV 
stations affiliated with a top-four TV network, this approach would 
limit this obligation to a smaller number of LPTV stations that have 
widely-viewed programming and are therefore likely to have greater 
resources. Alternatively, the NPRM asks whether we should include other 
LPTV network affiliates in the requirement to maintain an OPIF or, 
rather than tying any OPIF requirement for LPTV stations to network 
affiliation, whether we should instead apply the OPIF requirement to 
the top-four LPTV stations in each market based on the Nielsen ratings.
    108. If we were to require certain LPTV stations to comply with 
Sec.  73.3526, the NPRM proposes to take similar measures to reduce the 
burden on these LPTV stations that the Commission took when it 
transitioned full power and Class A TV stations and other media 
entities to OPIF. Specifically, we propose to require LPTV stations to 
upload only those items required to be in the public file but not 
otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the Commission's 
website. Any document or information required to be kept in the public 
file and that is required to be filed with the Commission 
electronically would be imported to the online public file and updated 
by the Commission. In addition, if we require certain LPTV stations to 
maintain records in OPIF, instead of paper file, LPTV stations may have 
initial costs, but the effort by small stations and their related costs 
over time will be minimized by exempting existing political file 
material from the online file requirement and by requiring only that 
political file documents be uploaded on a going-forward basis, similar 
to our approach with respect to other entities that have already 
transitioned to OPIF. Additionally, the NPRM recommends that LPTV 
stations be required to operate not less than 14 hours per calendar 
week instead of requiring the daily operational requirements of 
commercial full power stations, thereby allowing the flexibility needed 
for LPTV stations without traditional hours to serve their viewers.
    109. The remaining alternatives proposed by the Commission in the 
NPRM were considered to be the least costly and/or minimally burdensome 
for small and other entities impacted by the rules. The Commission 
expects to more fully consider the economic impact and alternatives for 
small entities following the review of comments filed in response to 
the NPRM.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule

    110. None.

V. Ordering Clauses

    111. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
found in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 303, 307, 309, 311, 312, and 315 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 
154(j), 303, 307, 309, 311, 312, 315 this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
is adopted.
    112. It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the 
Secretary, shall send a copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 11

    Television.

47 CFR Parts 73 and 74

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Television.

Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications

[[Page 53555]]

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 11, 73, and 74 to read as 
follows:

PART 11--EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM (EAS)

0
1. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (o), 303(r), 544(g), 606, 
1201, 1206.

0
2. Section 11.11 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text, table 1 to paragraph (a), and paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  11.11  The Emergency Alert System (EAS).

    (a) The EAS is composed of analog radio broadcast stations 
including AM, FM, and Low-power FM (LPFM) stations; digital audio 
broadcasting (DAB) stations, including digital AM, FM, and Low-power FM 
stations; television (TV) broadcast stations, including Class A and 
low-power TV (LPTV) stations; analog cable systems; digital cable 
systems which are defined for purposes of this part only as the portion 
of a cable system that delivers channels in digital format to 
subscribers at the input of a Unidirectional Digital Cable Product or 
other navigation device; wireline video systems; wireless cable systems 
which may consist of Broadband Radio Service (BRS), or Educational 
Broadband Service (EBS) stations; DBS services, as defined in Sec.  
25.701(a) of this chapter (including certain Ku-band Fixed-Satellite 
Service Direct to Home providers); and SDARS, as defined in Sec.  
25.201 of this chapter. These entities are referred to collectively as 
EAS Participants in this part, and are subject to this part, except as 
otherwise provided herein. At a minimum EAS Participants must use a 
common EAS protocol, as defined in Sec.  11.31, to send and receive 
emergency alerts, and comply with the requirements set forth in Sec.  
11.56, in accordance with the following tables:

                                     Table 1--Analog and Digital Broadcast Station Equipment Deployment Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Digital AM &   Analog & digital    Analog & digital
         EAS equipment requirement             AM & FM         FM           FM class D             LPFM              TV        Class A TV       LPTV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EAS decoder \1\...........................            Y             Y                   Y                   Y             Y             Y             Y
EAS encoder...............................            Y             Y                   N                   N             Y             Y             N
Audio message.............................            Y             Y                   Y                   Y             Y             Y             Y
Video message.............................          N/A           N/A                 N/A                 N/A             Y             Y             Y
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EAS Participants may comply with the obligations set forth in Sec.   11.56 to decode and convert CAP-formatted messages into EAS Protocol-compliant
  messages by deploying an Intermediary Device, as specified in Sec.   11.56(b).

* * * * *
    (b) Analog class D non-commercial educational FM stations as 
defined in Sec.  73.506 of this chapter, digital class D non-commercial 
educational FM stations, analog LPFM stations as defined in Sec. Sec.  
73.811 and 73.853 of this chapter, digital LPFM stations, and LPTV 
stations as defined in Sec.  74.701(b) of this chapter are not required 
to comply with Sec.  11.32. Television broadcast translator stations, 
as defined in Sec.  74.701(a) of this chapter, which entirely 
rebroadcast the programming of other broadcast televisions stations are 
not required to comply with the requirements of this part. FM broadcast 
booster stations as defined in Sec.  74.1201(f) of this chapter and FM 
translator stations as defined in Sec.  74.1201(a) of this chapter 
which entirely rebroadcast the programming of other local FM broadcast 
stations are not required to comply with the requirements of this part. 
International broadcast stations as defined in Sec.  73.701 of this 
chapter are not required to comply with the requirements of this part. 
Analog and digital broadcast stations that operate as satellites or 
repeaters of a hub station (or common studio or control point if there 
is no hub station) and rebroadcast 100 percent of the programming of 
the hub station (or common studio or control point) may satisfy the 
requirements of this part through the use of a single set of EAS 
equipment at the hub station (or common studio or control point) which 
complies with Sec. Sec.  11.32 and 11.33.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 11.51 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  11.51  EAS code and Attention Signal Transmission requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) Analog class D non-commercial educational FM stations as 
defined in Sec.  73.506 of this chapter, digital class D non-commercial 
educational FM stations, analog Low Power FM (LPFM) stations as defined 
in Sec. Sec.  73.811 and 73.853 of this chapter, digital LPFM stations, 
and LPTV stations as defined in Sec.  74.701(b) of this chapter are not 
required to have equipment capable of generating the EAS codes and 
Attention Signal specified in Sec.  11.31.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 11.61 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), 
(a)(2)(i)(A), and (a)(2)(ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  11.61  Tests of EAS procedures.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Tests in odd numbered months shall occur between 8:30 a.m. and 
local sunset. Tests in even numbered months shall occur between local 
sunset and 8:30 a.m. They will originate from Local or State Primary 
sources. The time and script content will be developed by State 
Emergency Communications Committees in cooperation with affected EAS 
Participants. Script content may be in the primary language of the EAS 
Participant. These monthly tests must be transmitted within 60 minutes 
of receipt by EAS Participants in an EAS Local Area or State. Analog 
and digital class D non-commercial educational FM, analog and digital 
LPFM stations, and LPTV stations are required to transmit only the test 
script.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Analog and digital AM, FM, and TV broadcast stations must 
conduct tests of the EAS header and EOM codes at least once a week at 
random days and times. DAB and TV stations must conduct these tests on 
all program streams.
* * * * *
    (ii) DBS providers, SDARS providers, analog and digital class D 
non-commercial educational FM stations, analog and digital LPFM 
stations, and LPTV stations are not required to transmit this test but 
must log receipt, as specified in Sec.  11.35(a) and 11.54(a)(3).
* * * * *

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

0
5. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:


[[Page 53556]]


    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334, 
336, 339.

0
6. Section 73.619 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.619  Contours and service areas.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) In predicting the distance to the field strength contours, the 
F (50,50) field strength charts (Figures 9, 10 and 10b of Sec.  73.699) 
and the F (50,10) field strength charts (Figures 9a, 10a and 10c of 
Sec.  73.699) shall be used. To use the charts to predict the distance 
to a given F (50,90) contour, the following procedure is used: Convert 
the effective radiated power in kilowatts for the appropriate azimuth 
into decibel value referenced to 1 kW (dBk). Subtract the power value 
in dBk from the contour value in dBu. Note that for power less than 1 
kW, the difference value will be greater than the contour value because 
the power in dBk is negative. Locate the difference value obtained on 
the vertical scale at the left edge of the appropriate F (50,50) chart 
for the TV station's channel. Follow the horizontal line for that value 
into the chart to the point of intersection with the vertical line 
above the height of the antenna above average terrain for the 
appropriate azimuth located on the scale at the bottom of the chart. If 
the point of intersection does not fall exactly on a distance curve, 
interpolate between the distance curves below and above the 
intersection point. The distance values for the curves are located 
along the right edge of the chart. Using the appropriate F (50,10) 
chart for the TV station's channel, locate the point where the distance 
coincides with the vertical line above the height of the antenna above 
average terrain for the appropriate azimuth located on the scale at the 
bottom of the chart. Follow a horizontal line from that point to the 
left edge of the chart to determine the F (50,10) difference value. Add 
the power value in dBk to this difference value to determine the F 
(50,10) contour value in dBu. Subtract the F (50,50) contour value in 
dBu from this F (50,10) contour value in dBu. Subtract this difference 
from the F (50,50) contour value in dBu to determine the F (50,90) 
contour value in dBu at the pertinent distance along the pertinent 
radial.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 73.625 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(4)(i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.625  TV antenna system.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) In cases where it is proposed to use a tower of an AM broadcast 
station as a supporting structure for a TV broadcast antenna, an 
appropriate application for changes in the radiating system of the AM 
broadcast station must be filed by the licensee thereof. A formal 
application (FCC Form 2100 Schedule 301-AM) will be required if the 
proposal involves substantial change in the physical height or 
radiation characteristics of the AM broadcast antennas; otherwise an 
informal application will be acceptable. (In case of doubt, an informal 
application (letter) together with complete engineering data should be 
submitted.) An application may be required for other classes of 
stations when the tower is to be used in connection with a TV station.
* * * * *
0
8. Section 73.2080 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.2080  Equal employment opportunities (EEO).

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) If a station is subject to a time brokerage agreement, the 
licensee shall file Form 2100 Schedule 396 and EEO public file reports 
concerning only its own recruitment activity. If a licensee is a broker 
of another station or stations, the licensee-broker shall include its 
recruitment activity for the brokered station(s) in determining the 
bases of Form 2100 Schedule 396 and the EEO public file reports for its 
own station. If a licensee-broker owns more than one station, it shall 
include its recruitment activity for the brokered station in the Form 
2100 Schedule 396 and EEO public file reports filed for its own station 
that is most closely affiliated with, and in the same market as, the 
brokered station. If a licensee-broker does not own a station in the 
same market as the brokered station, then it shall include its 
recruitment activity for the brokered station in the Form 2100 Schedule 
396 and EEO public file reports filed for its own station that is 
geographically closest to the brokered station.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2), 
(e)(11)(iii), and (e)(14) through (17) to read as follows:


Sec.  73.3526  Online public inspection file of commercial stations.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Every permittee or licensee of an AM, FM, TV, or Class A TV 
station in the commercial broadcast services, and every permittee or 
licensee of an LPTV station affiliated with a top-four TV network (ABC, 
CBS, NBC, or Fox), shall maintain a public inspection file containing 
the material, relating to that station, described in paragraphs (e)(1) 
through (e)(10) and paragraphs (e)(13) and (e)(19) of this section. In 
addition, every permittee or licensee of a commercial TV station shall 
maintain for public inspection a file containing material, relating to 
that station, described in paragraphs (e)(11) and (e)(14), (e)(15), 
(e)(16), and (e)(18) of this section, every permittee or licensee of a 
Class A TV station shall maintain for public inspection a file 
containing material, relating to that station, described in paragraphs 
(e)(11), (e)(14), (e)(15), (e)(16) and (e)(17)of this section, every 
permittee or licensee of an LPTV station affiliated with a top-four TV 
network shall maintain for public inspection a file containing 
material, relating to that station, described in paragraphs (e)(14), 
(e)(15), and (e)(16) of this section, and every permittee or licensee 
of a commercial AM or FM station shall maintain for public inspection a 
file containing the material, relating to that station, described in 
paragraphs (e)(12), (e)(14), and (e)(16) of this section. A separate 
file shall be maintained for each station for which an authorization is 
outstanding, and the file shall be maintained so long as an 
authorization to operate the station is outstanding.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (11) * * *
    (iii) Children's television programming reports. For commercial TV 
and Class A broadcast stations on an annual basis, a completed 
Children's Television Programming Report (``Report''), on FCC Form 2100 
Schedule H, reflecting efforts made by the licensee during the 
preceding year to serve the educational and informational needs of 
children. The Report is to be electronically filed with the Commission 
by the thirtieth (30) day of the succeeding calendar year. A copy of 
the Report will also be linked to the station's online public 
inspection file by the FCC. The Report shall identify the licensee's 
educational and informational programming efforts, including programs 
aired by the station that are specifically designed to serve the 
educational and informational needs of children. The Report shall 
include the name of the individual at the station responsible for 
collecting comments on the station's compliance with the Children's 
Television Act, and it shall be separated from other materials in the 
public inspection file. These Reports

[[Page 53557]]

shall be retained in the public inspection file until final action has 
been taken on the station's next license renewal application.
* * * * *
    (14) Radio and television time brokerage agreements. For commercial 
radio and television stations, and LPTV stations affiliated with a top-
four TV network, a copy of every agreement or contract involving time 
brokerage of the licensee's station or of another station by the 
licensee, whether the agreement involves stations in the same markets 
or in differing markets, with confidential or proprietary information 
redacted where appropriate. These agreements shall be placed in the 
public file within 30 days of execution and retained in the file as 
long as the contract or agreement is in force.
    (15) Must-carry or retransmission consent election. Statements of a 
commercial television or Class A television station's election, or the 
election of an LPTV station affiliated with a top-four TV network, with 
respect to either must-carry or re-transmission consent, as defined in 
Sec. Sec.  76.64 and 76.1608 of this chapter. These records shall be 
retained for the duration of the three year election period to which 
the statement applies. Commercial television stations shall, no later 
than July 31, 2020, provide an up-to-date email address and phone 
number for carriage-related questions and respond as soon as is 
reasonably possible to messages or calls from multichannel video 
programming distributors (MVPDs). Each commercial television station is 
responsible for the continuing accuracy and completeness of the 
information furnished.
    (16) Radio and television joint sales agreements. For commercial 
radio and commercial television stations, and for LPTV stations 
affiliated with a top-four TV network, a copy of agreement for the 
joint sale of advertising time involving the station, whether the 
agreement involves stations in the same markets or in differing 
markets, with confidential or proprietary information redacted where 
appropriate. These agreements shall be placed in the public file within 
30 days of execution and retained in the file as long as the contract 
or agreement is in force.
    (17) Class A TV continuing eligibility. Documentation sufficient to 
demonstrate that the Class A television station is continuing to meet 
the eligibility requirements set forth at Sec.  73.6001. Such 
documentation must be filed every calendar quarter by the tenth day of 
the succeeding calendar quarter (e.g., January 10 for the quarter 
October-December, April 10 for the quarter January-March, etc.). The 
documentation shall include a certification that the Class A television 
station is continuing to meet the eligibility requirements set forth at 
Sec.  73.6001 and shall include, but shall not be limited to, the time, 
date, duration, and title of each locally produced program that was 
aired during that calendar quarter. The documentation described in this 
paragraph shall be retained in the public inspection file until final 
action has been taken on the station's next license renewal 
application.
* * * * *
0
10. Section 73.3572 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.3572  Processing of TV broadcast, Class A TV broadcast, low 
power TV, and TV translators applications.

    (a) * * *
    (2) In the case of Class A TV stations authorized under subpart J 
of this part and low power TV and TV translator stations authorized 
under part 74 of this chapter, major or minor changes are defined in 
Sec.  74.787(b).
* * * * *
0
11. Section 73.3580 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.3580  Local public notice of filing of broadcast applications.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Locally originating programming. Programming from a low power 
television (LPTV) or television translator station as defined in Sec.  
74.701(g) of this chapter.
* * * * *
0
12. Section 73.4060 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.4060  Citizens agreements.

    (a) See Report and Order, Docket 20495, FCC 75-1359, adopted 
December 10, 1975. 57 F.C.C. 2d 42; 40 FR 59730, December 30, 1975.
* * * * *
0
13. Section 73.6001 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.6001  Eligibility and service requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) Licensees unable to continue to meet the minimum operating 
requirements for Class A television stations, or which elect to revert 
to low power television status, shall promptly notify the Commission, 
in writing, and request a change in status. The station's call sign 
will be modified to one consistent with the requirements of Sec.  
74.791(c) following reversion to low power television status.
* * * * *
0
14. Amend Sec.  73.6002 by revising paragraph (a)(2) and adding 
paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  73.6002  Licensing requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Files an acceptable application for a Class A Television 
license (FCC Form 2100 Schedule F).
    (b) Community coverage requirements.
    (1) A Class A station's protected contour (see Sec.  73.6010 of 
this subpart) is required to overlap with at least a portion of its 
community of license.
    (2) To change a Class A station's community of license, a 
modification of license must be filed specifying the new community and 
including an exhibit indicating that the protected contour of the 
facility specified in the license to cover overlaps with at least a 
portion of the proposed community of license. A station may change its 
community of license no more than once every 12 months.
    (3) For purposes of determining whether a community of license's 
boundary overlaps with a station's protected service contour, an 
applicant shall use the legal boundary of the community as may be 
designated by any Federal, state, local, or tribal governmental entity.
0
15. Section 73.6017 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  73.6017  Class A TV station protection of Class A TV stations.

    An application to change the facilities of a Class A TV station 
will not be accepted if it fails to protect authorized Class A stations 
in accordance with the requirements of Sec.  74.793 (b) through (d), 
(g), and (j) of this chapter. This protection must be afforded to 
applications for changes in other authorized Class A stations filed 
prior to the date the Class A application is filed.
0
16. Section 73.6019 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  73.6019  Class A TV station protection of low power TV and TV 
translator stations.

    An application to change the facilities of a Class A TV station 
will not be accepted if it fails to protect authorized low power TV and 
TV translator stations in accordance with the requirements of Sec.  
74.793(b) through (d), (h), and (j) of this chapter. This protection 
must be afforded to applications for changes filed prior to the date 
the Class A station is filed.

[[Page 53558]]

0
17. Section 73.6023 is amended by adding paragraph (f)(6) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.6023  Distributed transmission systems.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (6) All DTS transmitters must use the same emission mask. See Sec.  
73.6024(d) of this subpart regarding permissible emission masks.
* * * * *
0
18. Section 73.7003 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(4), 
and (c)(5)(ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  73.7003  Point system selection procedures.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Local diversity of ownership. Two points for applicants with no 
attributable interests, as defined in Sec.  73.7000, in any other 
broadcast station or authorized construction permit (comparing radio to 
radio and television to television) whose principal community (city 
grade) contour overlaps that of the proposed station. The principal 
community (city grade) contour is the 5 mV/m for AM stations, the 3.16 
mV/m for FM stations calculated in accordance with Sec.  73.313(c), and 
the contour identified in Sec.  73.618(a) for TV. Radio applicants will 
count commercial and noncommercial AM, FM, and FM translator stations 
other than fill-in stations. Television applicants will count UHF, VHF, 
and Class A stations.
* * * * *
    (4) Technical parameters. One point to the applicant covering the 
largest geographic area and population with its relevant contour (60 
dBu for FM and NLSC for TV), provided that the applicant covers both a 
ten percent greater area and a ten percent greater population than the 
applicant with the next best technical proposal. The top applicant will 
receive two points instead of one point if its technical proposal 
covers both a 25 percent greater area and 25 percent greater population 
than the next best technical proposal.)
    (c) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) Groups of more than three tied, grantable applications will 
not be eligible for licensing under this section. Where such groups 
exist, the Commission will dismiss all but the applications of the 
three applicants that have been local, as defined in Sec.  73.7000, for 
the longest uninterrupted periods of time. The Commission will then 
process the remaining applications as set forth in paragraph (c)(5)(i) 
of this section.
* * * * *

PART 74--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER 
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES

0
19. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 310, 325, 336 and 
554.

0
20. Section 74.701 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) 
through (g), and removing paragraphs (h) through (m) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  74.701  Definitions.

    (a) Television broadcast translator station (TV translator). A 
station operated for the purpose of retransmitting the programs and 
signals of a television broadcast station, without significantly 
altering any characteristic of the original signal other than its 
frequency, for the purpose of providing television reception to the 
general public.
    (b) Low power TV station (LPTV). A station authorized under the 
provisions of this subpart that may retransmit the programs and signals 
of a television broadcast station, may originate programming in any 
amount greater than 30 seconds per hour for the purpose of providing 
television reception to the general public and, subject to a minimum 
video program service requirement, may offer services of an ancillary 
or supplementary nature, including subscription-based services. (See 
Sec.  74.790.)
* * * * *
    (e) Primary station. The television station which provides the 
programs and signals being retransmitted by a television broadcast 
translator station.
    (f) Existing low power television or television translator station. 
When used in this subpart, the terms existing low power television and 
existing television translator station refer to a low power television 
station or television translator station that is either licensed or has 
a valid construction permit.
    (g) Local origination. For purposes of this part, local origination 
shall be any transmissions other than the simultaneous retransmission 
of the programs and signals of a TV broadcast station or transmissions 
related to service offerings of an ancillary or supplementary nature. 
Origination shall include locally generated television program signals 
and program signals obtained via video recordings (tapes and discs), 
microwave, common carrier circuits, or other sources.
0
21. Section 74.720 is amended by revising the section heading and 
paragraphs (a) and (b), adding paragraph (e)(6), and revising paragraph 
(f) to read as follows:


Sec.  74.720  Low power TV distributed transmission systems.

    (a) A low power TV or TV translator (LPTV) station may be 
authorized to operate multiple synchronized transmitters on its 
assigned channel to provide service consistent with the requirements of 
this section. Such operation is called a distributed transmission 
system (DTS). Except as expressly provided in this section, LPTV 
stations operating a DTS facility must comply with all rules in this 
part applicable to LPTV single-transmitter stations.
    (b) For purposes of compliance with this section, a LPTV station's 
``authorized facility'' is the facility authorized for the station in a 
license or construction permit for non-DTS, single-transmitter-location 
operation. An LPTV station's ``authorized service area'' is defined as 
the area within its protected contour (described by Sec.  74.792) as 
determined using the authorized facility.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) All DTS transmitters must use the same emission mask. See Sec.  
74.794 of this subpart regarding permissible emission masks.
    (f) All transmitters operating under a single LPTV DTS license must 
follow the same broadcast television transmission standard.
0
22. Section 74.732 is amended by revising paragraphs (d) and (e) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  74.732  Eligibility and licensing requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) The FCC will not act on applications for new low power TV or TV 
translator stations, or for changes in facilities of existing stations, 
when such changes will result in a major change, until the applicable 
time for filing a petition to deny has passed pursuant to section 
73.3584(c) of this subpart.
    (e) A proposal to change the primary TV station(s) being 
retransmitted will be subject only to a notification requirement.
* * * * *
0
23. Section 74.763 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  74.763  Time of operation.

    (a) Stations authorized subject to this subpart are required to 
operate with the following schedules:

[[Page 53559]]

    (1) The licensee of a low power TV station is required to air a 
minimum of 14 hours per calendar week of programming. Such operation 
must be consistent with Sec.  73.1740(a)(2)(iii).
    (2) The licensee of a TV translator, DRT, or DTDRT station is 
required to provide service to the extent that such is within its 
control and to avoid unwarranted interruptions in the service provided.
    (3) All LPTV or TV translator station applicants for construction 
permits for minor or major modification of a licensed facility or 
applicants for renewal of a license must certify that the station has 
complied with the minimum operating requirement for its class of 
service set forth in this section. If an applicant cannot make such a 
certification, it must explain why and demonstrate that grant of such 
application is in the public interest.
* * * * *
0
24. Section 74.780 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  74.780  Broadcast regulations applicable to translators and low 
power stations.

    (a) The following rules are applicable to TV translator and low 
power TV stations:
    (1) 47 CFR part 5--Experimental authorizations.
    (2) 47 CFR 73.658--Affiliation agreements and network program 
practices; territorial exclusivity in non-network program arrangements.
    (3) 47 CFR 73.1030--Notifications concerning interference to radio 
astronomy, research, and receiving installations.
    (4) 47 CFR 73.1206--Broadcast of telephone conversations.
    (5) 47 CFR 73.1207--Rebroadcasts.
    (6) 47 CFR 73.1208--Broadcast of taped, filmed, or recorded 
material.
    (7) 47 CFR 73.1211--Broadcast of lottery information.
    (8) 47 CFR 73.1212--Sponsorship identifications; list retention; 
related requirements.
    (9) 47 CFR 73.1216--Licensee-conducted contests.
    (10) 47 CFR 73.1515--Special field test authorizations.
    (11) 47 CFR 73.1615--Operation during modification of facilities.
    (12) 47 CFR 73.1620--Program tests.
    (13) 47 CFR 73.1635--Special temporary authorizations (STA).
    (14) 47 CFR 73.1650--International agreements.
    (15) 47 CFR 73.1680--Emergency antennas.
    (16) 47 CFR 73.1740(a)(2)(iii)--Minimum operating schedule.
    (17) 47 CFR 73.1940--Legally qualified candidates for public 
office.
    (18) 47 CFR 73.3500--Application and report forms.
    (19) 47 CFR 73.3511--Applications required.
    (20) 47 CFR 73.3512--Where to file; number of copies.
    (21) 47 CFR 73.3513--Signing of applications.
    (22) 47 CFR 73.3514--Content of applications.
    (23) 47 CFR 73.3516--Specification of facilities.
    (24) 47 CFR 73.3517--Contingent applications.
    (25) 47 CFR 73.3518--Inconsistent or conflicting applications.
    (26) 47 CFR 73.3519--Repetitious applications.
    (27) 47 CFR 73.3521--Mutually exclusive applications for low power 
TV and TV translator stations.
    (28) 47 CFR 73.3522--Amendment of applications.
    (29) 47 CFR 73.3525--Agreements for removing application conflicts.
    (30) 47 CFR 73.3533--Application for construction permit or 
modification of construction permit.
    (31) 47 CFR 73.3536--Application for license to cover construction 
permit.
    (32) 47 CFR 73.3538(a)(1), (3), and (4) and (b)--Application to 
make changes in an existing station.
    (33) 47 CFR 73.3539--Application for renewal of license.
    (34) 47 CFR 73.3540--Application for voluntary assignment or 
transfer of control.
    (35) 47 CFR 73.3541--Application for involuntary assignment of 
license or transfer of control.
    (36) 47 CFR 73.3542--Application for emergency authorization.
    (37) 47 CFR 73.3544--Application to obtain a modified station 
license.
    (38) 47 CFR 73.3545--Application for permit to deliver programs to 
foreign stations.
    (39) 47 CFR 73.3550--Requests for new or modified call sign 
assignments.
    (40) 47 CFR 73.3561--Staff consideration of applications requiring 
Commission action.
    (41) 47 CFR 73.3562--Staff consideration of applications not 
requiring action by the Commission.
    (42) 47 CFR 73.3564--Acceptance of applications.
    (43) 47 CFR 73.3566--Defective applications.
    (44) 47 CFR 73.3568--Dismissal of applications.
    (45) 47 CFR 73.3572--Processing of TV broadcast, low power TV, and 
TV translator station applications.
    (46) 47 CFR 73.3580--Local public notice of filing of broadcast 
applications.
    (47) 47 CFR 73.3584--Petitions to deny.
    (48) 47 CFR 73.3587--Informal objections.
    (49) 47 CFR 73.3591--Grants without hearing.
    (50) 47 CFR 73.3593--Designation for hearing.
    (51) 47 CFR 73.3594--Local public notice of designation for 
hearing.
    (52) 47 CFR 73.3597--Procedures on transfer and assignment 
applications.
    (53) 47 CFR 73.3598--Period of construction.
    (54) 47 CFR 73.3601--Simultaneous modification and renewal of 
license.
    (55) 47 CFR 73.3603--Special waiver procedure relative to 
applications.
    (b) The following rules are applicable to low power TV stations 
only:
    (1) 47 CFR part 11--Emergency Alert System.
    (2) 47 CFR 73.1941--Equal opportunities.
    (3) 47 CFR 73.1942--Candidate rates.
    (4) 47 CFR 73.1943--Political file.
    (5) 47 CFR 73.1944--Reasonable access.
    (6) 47 CFR 73.2080--Equal employment opportunities.
    (7) 47 CFR 73.3526--Online public inspection file of commercial 
stations.
    (8) 47 CFR 73.3612--Annual employment report.
    (9) 47 CFR 73.3613--Availability to FCC of station contracts 
(network affiliation contracts only).
0
25. Section 74.781 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  74.781  Station records.

* * * * *
    (c) LPTV stations affiliated with a top-four TV network (ABC, CBS, 
NBC, or Fox) must maintain an OPIF consistent with Sec.  73.3526 of 
this Chapter. For LPTV records in this section not required to be 
included in OPIF and for translator stations, the station records shall 
be maintained for public inspection at a residence, office, or public 
building, place of business, or other suitable place, in one of the 
communities of license of the LPTV or translator, except that the 
station records of a translator licensed to the licensee of the primary 
station may be kept at the same place where the primary station records 
are kept. The station records shall also be made available upon request 
to any authorized representative of the Commission.
* * * * *
0
26. Section 74.783 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  74.783  Station identification.

    (a) Each low power TV station as defined by Sec.  74.701(b) must 
transmit its

[[Page 53560]]

station identification using one of the following methods:
    (1) When originating programming, as defined by Sec.  74.701(g), a 
low power TV station may use the station identification procedures 
given in Sec.  73.1201 of this chapter on its primary stream. Other 
streams may use the method in paragraph (a)(2) of this section. The 
identification procedures given in the remainder of this paragraph are 
to be used at any time the station is not originating programming; or
* * * * *
0
27. Section 74.784 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  74.784  Rebroadcasts.

* * * * *
    (e) The provisions of Sec.  73.1207 of part 73 of this chapter 
apply to low power TV stations in transmitting any material during 
periods of local origination obtained from the transmissions of any 
other type of station.
* * * * *
0
28. Section 74.787 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), 
revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (b)(1)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  74.787  Licensing.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Community coverage requirements. (i) A low power TV or TV 
translator station's protected contour (see Sec.  74.792) is required 
to overlap with at least a portion of its community of license.
    (ii) To change a low power TV or TV translator station's community 
of license, a modification of license must be filed specifying the new 
community and including an exhibit indicating that the protected 
contour of the facility specified in the license to cover overlaps with 
at least a portion of the proposed community of license. A station may 
change its community of license no more than once every 12 months.
    (iii) For purposes of determining whether a community of license's 
boundary overlaps with a station's protected service contour, an 
applicant shall use the legal boundary of the community as may be 
designated by any Federal, state, local, or tribal governmental entity.
    (2) Conversion between low power TV and TV translator.
    (i) A TV translator station may convert to a low power TV station 
by filing a modification of license requesting the conversion. The 
station's call sign must be modified to one consistent with Sec.  
74.791(c) after converting to a low power TV station.
    (ii) A low power TV station may convert to a TV translator station 
by filing a modification of license requesting the conversion. It shall 
specify the facility ID and call sign of the station(s) to be 
translated in its filing. The station's call sign will be modified to 
one consistent with Sec.  74.791(b) after converting to a TV translator 
station.
* * * * *
    (4) Displacement applications. (i) Stations eligible to file 
displacement applications must meet at least one of the following 
requirements:
    (A) Cause actual interference at multiple locations within a TV 
broadcast station's noise-limited service contour (See Sec.  
73.619(c)). If the interference is within the community of license of 
the TV broadcast station, then a single report of interference is 
sufficient for displacement.
    (B) Cause predicted interference beyond the amount specified in 
Sec.  74.792(e) with respect to a TV broadcast station, allotment, or 
other protected station or service, except if such interference has 
been previously accepted.
    (C) Receive predicted interference beyond the amount specified in 
Sec.  74.792(h) with respect to a TV broadcast station, allotment, or 
other protected station or service, except if such interference has 
been previously accepted.
    (D) Cause interference to the input channel of a TV translator, 
DRT, or DTDRT station either located at the same or a nearby location 
as the existing low power TV, TV translator, DRT, or DTDRT operation.
    (E) Cause interference to land mobile operations such that it must 
otherwise cease operations consistent with Sec.  74.703(e).
    (F) Is predicted to cause or receive interference to or from an 
authorized TV broadcast station or allotment with respect to protected 
foreign stations.
    (ii) In the event a channel substitution in the Table of TV 
Allotments is the cause of a station's displacement, the displacement 
permit may not be granted prior to the grant of the construction permit 
of the station which requested the channel substitution. Further, a 
displaced station may only file an application for displacement relief 
after the channel substitution is final.
    (iii) Eligible stations may file a displacement relief application 
on FCC Form 2100, Schedule C for change in channel at any time, 
together with technical modifications that are necessary to avoid 
interference or continue serving the station's protected service area. 
The application should indicate the specific cause of displacement from 
paragraph (i) of this section. Such applications are treated as minor 
modifications and must be consistent with paragraph (b) of this 
section.
    (iv) Displacement relief applications will not be subject to the 
filing of competing applications.
    (v) Where a displacement relief application for a low power 
television or television translator station becomes mutually exclusive 
with the application(s) for new low power television or television 
translator stations, or with other non-displacement relief applications 
for facilities modifications of low power television or television 
translator stations, priority will be afforded to the displacement 
application for the low power television or television translator 
station to the exclusion of other applications, except as otherwise 
specified with respect to DRTs and DTDRTs in paragraph (a)(5)(iii).
    (vi) Mutually exclusive displacement relief applications for low 
power television and television translator stations shall be resolved 
via the Commission's part 1 and broadcast competitive bidding rules, 
Sec. Sec.  1.2100 through 1.2199, and 73.5000 through 73.5009 of this 
chapter. Such applicants shall be afforded an opportunity to submit 
settlements and engineering solutions to resolve mutual exclusivity 
pursuant to Sec.  73.5002(d) of this chapter.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Any change in transmitting antenna location of greater than 
48.3 kilometers from the coordinates of the existing antenna location.
* * * * *
0
29. Section 74.790 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(2) and adding 
paragraph (p) to read as follows:


Sec.  74.790  Permissible service of TV translator and LPTV stations.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) For the origination of programming and commercial matter as 
defined in Sec.  74.701(g).
* * * * *
    (p) No broadcast television stations are permitted to operate on 
channels above 36.
0
30. Section 74.791 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) through (c) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  74.791  Call signs.

    (a) New low power and television translator stations. Call signs 
for new

[[Page 53561]]

low power television and television translator stations will be made up 
of a prefix consisting of the initial letter K or W followed by the 
channel number assigned to the station and two additional letters and a 
suffix consisting of the letters -D, consistent with paragraph (d) of 
this section. Prior to filing a license to cover, a new low power 
television station must modify its call sign to be consistent with the 
requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Television translator stations. Call signs for television 
translator stations will be made up of a prefix consisting of the 
initial letter K or W followed by the channel number assigned to the 
station and two additional letters and a suffix consisting of the 
letter -D, consistent with paragraph (d) of this section.
    (c) Low power television stations and Class A television stations. 
Low power television and Class A television stations will be made up of 
a call sign with a four-letter prefix pursuant to Sec.  73.3550 of this 
chapter along with a two-letter suffix. Low power stations will be 
assigned the suffix -LD and Class A stations will be assigned the 
suffix -CD.
* * * * *
0
31. Section 74.793 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding 
paragraphs (i) and (j) to read as follows:


Sec.  74.793  Low power TV and TV translator station protection of 
broadcast stations.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided in this section, interference prediction 
analysis is based on the interference thresholds (D/U signal strength 
ratios) and other criteria and methods specified in Sec.  73.620 of 
this chapter. The 2 km cell size specified in Sec.  73.620(b) is not 
permitted for Class A, LPTV, TV translator, DRT, and DTDRT stations, 
and if not specified in the application, the 1 km cell size will be 
assumed.
* * * * *
    (i) LPTV, TV translator, DRT, and DTDRT stations may negotiate 
interference consent agreements consistent with Sec. Sec.  73.620(e) 
and 73.6022.
    (j) If an existing authorization exceeds the interference 
thresholds consistent with paragraphs (g) or (h) of this section, when 
filing a non-displacement minor modification it may create interference 
up to but not exceeding the level previously authorized. In determining 
this level, the proposal shall use the same cell size and path profile 
increment in showing both the existing and proposed interference. If 
the proposal is subject to a formal interference agreement, that 
agreement must be included as an exhibit to the application.
0
32. Section 74.794 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  74.794  Emissions.

    (a)(1) An applicant for an LPTV or TV translator station 
construction permit shall specify that the station will be constructed 
to confine out-of-channel emissions within one of the following 
emission masks: Simple, stringent, or full service. Stations proposing 
new or modified operation on channel 14 shall specify either the 
stringent or full service emission mask.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-13812 Filed 6-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P