Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on the Existing Television Service

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 87-268; FCC 96-317]

Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on the Existing

Television Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission is continuing the process for implementation of

the next era of broadcast television: digital television (DTV) service.

In this action, the Commission proposes policies for developing the

initial DTV Table of Allotments, procedures for assigning DTV

frequencies, and plans for spectrum recovery. The Commission also

proposes technical criteria for the allotment of additional DTV

frequencies and provides a draft DTV Table of Allotments. These

proposals are intended to provide frequencies on which broadcasters

will operate digital television service and to plan for recovery of

spectrum from television service for other uses.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 22, 1996, and

reply comments on or before December 23, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Franca (202-418-2470), Alan

Stillwell (202-418-2470) or Robert Eckert (202-428-2470), Office of

Engineering and Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Sixth

Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 96-

317, adopted July 25, 1996. The full text of this decision is available

for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC

Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. The

complete text of this decision also may be purchased from the

Commission's duplicating contractor, International Transcription

Service, 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, (202-857-3800).

Summary of the Sixth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making

1. In this action, the Commission is continuing the DTV

implementation process by proposing policies for developing the initial

DTV allotments and procedures for assigning DTV frequencies to

broadcasters. The Commission also proposed technical criteria for the

allotment of additional DTV frequencies and provided a draft DTV Table

of Allotments. The draft Table, which shows how digital frequencies

might be allotted in individual markets, is based on the principles of

accommodating all eligible broadcasters, replicating existing service

areas, and sound spectrum management. The Commission stated that, while

it expects the final DTV Table of Allotments to be based on these

principles, the Table issued in this Further Notice is a draft and

revisions are anticipated. The Commission's staff will work with

broadcasters and other parties to revise the Table as appropriate. The

Commission said that its goals in this phase of the proceeding are to

ensure that the spectrum is used efficiently and effectively through

reliance on market forces, and to ensure that the introduction of

digital television fully serves the public interest.

2. The Commission is proposing several primary objectives for

guiding the development of DTV allotments and assignments to ensure

that broadcasters will be able to transition their transmitting

facilities to DTV service. The first of these principles is to fully

accommodate all eligible broadcasters,

[[Page 43210]]

i.e., the Commission will attempt to provide a second channel for DTV

service for all existing NTSC broadcasters. Eligible broadcasters

include: (1) all full service television broadcast stations licensees;

(2) permittees authorized as of October 24, 1994; and (3) all parties

with applications for a construction permit on file as of October 24,

1991, who are ultimately awarded full-service broadcast station

licenses. This approach would ensure that all full service broadcasters

are able to provide digital TV service.

3. The second objective is to provide, to the extent possible, all

existing broadcasters with a DTV service area that is comparable to

their existing NTSC service area (service replication). Broadcasters

would thus be assigned channels that replicate the service areas of

their existing stations.

4. The third objective is to attempt to minimize all unavoidable

interference without preference to either NTSC or DTV service. The

proposed allotment approach would balance unavoidable interference

among both NTSC and DTV stations equally.

5. The Commission stated that it intends to consider a spectrum

plan under which all future digital TV service would eventually be

located in a core region of the existing VHF and UHF broadcast

spectrum, namely the spectrum at VHF channels 7-13 and UHF channels 14-

51. This is the area of the TV spectrum that is technically best suited

for the transmission of DTV. Under this plan, the Commission would

attempt to provide all broadcasters with access to a 6 MHz channel for

DTV broadcasting within the core region. Because of the limited

availability of spectrum and the need to accommodate all existing

facilities with minimal interference among stations, however, some

broadcasters would be provided transition DTV channels outside this

area. These broadcasters would move their DTV operations to a channel

in the core spectrum when one became available. This plan would permit

the eventual recovery of 138 MHz of spectrum nationwide. This spectrum

wold be obtained from the lower VHF channels, i.e., channels 2-6, and

the upper UHF channels, i.e., channels 52-69. The Commission further

observed that this plan may facilitate the early recovery of channels

60-69.

6. The FNPRM also asks for comment on an option suggested by the

Association of Maximum Service Television, Inc. This approach would not

attempt to concentrate DTV allotments in a core area of the spectrum.

Since all channels would be available, such an approach could

theoretically provide for some degree of improved service area

replication and interference performance. Such an approach might also

have less impact on low power TV and TV translator stations. On the

other hand, this option would place more DTV stations on channels that

are less desirable for broadcast operations. Further, early recovery of

spectrum would be more difficult and therefore less likely.

7. The Commission also presented a number of proposals for other

policies, procedures and technical criteria to be used in allotting DTV

channels. These proposals include: (1) specifying the use of existing

NTSC transmitter site coordinates as the reference points for the new

DTV allotments; (2) deleting all existing vacant NTSC allotments to

provide sufficient spectrum for DTV and, where feasible, replacing

deleted NTSC vacant noncommercial allotments with new DTV allotments;

(3) avoiding the use of TV channels 3, 4, and 6 to minimize

interference to cable terminal devices, VCRs and FM radio service; and,

(4) protecting land mobile authorizations on channels 14-20. In

addition, the Commission requested comments and proposals regarding an

appropriate frequency labeling scheme for DTV service.

8. The Commission proposed to continue the secondary status of low

power TV and TV translator stations. However, it requested comment on

ways in which to minimize the impact on low power operations.

9. The construction of an actual Table of Allotments is an

extremely complex and difficult task. To fulfill this task, the

Commission's our staff has developed sophisticated operations research

methodology and computer software that provides the capability to

produce allotment/assignment table based on alternative policy plans

and to incorporate alternate allotment schemes that may be negotiated

by broadcasters.

10. The Commission proposed an initial DTV Table of Allotments that

is based on the principles, policies and methodologies described above.

This Table, which provides a DTV allotment for all 1578 eligible

broadcasters and also allows for an additional 143 DTV allotments to be

reserved for future noncommercial use, meets all of the Commission's

proposed policy objectives.

11. The Commission stated that it intended to provide broadcasters

an opportunity to negotiate changes to the proposed DTV Table of

Allotments and would consider such negotiated changes in the

development of the final DTV Table. Specifically, the Commission

indicated that it will permit broadcasters within a community to

exchange among themselves their designated allotments. It also stated

that it will permit broadcasters to develop alternative allotment/

assignment plans for their local area.

12. The Commission stated that, consistent with its proposal to

eliminate all existing vacant allotments, it will not accept additional

applications for new NTSC stations that are filed after 30 days from

the publication of this Further Notice in the Federal Register. This

will provide time for filing of any applications that are currently

under preparation. The Commission stated that as it processes the

applications on file now and those that are filed before the end of

this filing opportunity, it will continue its current policy of

considering requests for waiver of its 1987 freeze Order (Order, RM-

5811, Mimeo No. 4074, released July 17, 1987), on a case-by-case basis.

When applications for new stations are accepted for filing, the

Commission will continue its process of issuing Public Notices that

``cut-off'' the opportunity for filing competing, mutually-exclusive

applications. In connection with these cut-off notices, it will allow

additional competing applications to be filed after the end of this

filing opportunity. The Commission indicated that while it anticipates

that these applications for new NTSC TV stations on existing allotments

will not have a significant negative impact on the development of the

DTV Table of Allotments, it reserves the right, in specific cases, to

determine that the public interest is better served if they are not

granted, granted only if amended to specify reduced facilities, or

granted only with a condition that limits the interference that the

station would be allowed to cause.

13. The Commission stated that it also will not accept petitions

for rule making proposing to amend the existing TV Table of Allotments

in Section 73.606(b) of the rules, 47 CFR Section 73.606(b), to add an

allotment for a new NTSC station. Other petitions to amend the TV Table

of Allotments (for example, proposing to change a station's community

of license or altering the channel on which it operates, including

changes in which channel allotment in a community is reserved for

noncommercial educational use) can continue to be filed, but any such

changes to the table that include a modification of a station's

authorization will be conditioned on the outcome of this DTV rule

making proceeding. This termination of the opportunity to file

petitions to add NTSC allotments for new stations is effective as of

the close

[[Page 43211]]

of business on the date of adoption of this Further Notice. Any

petitions that are currently on file and any rule making proceedings

that are currently open will be addressed on a case-by-case basis,

taking into account the impact on the draft DTV allotment table. For

those pending cases in which a new NTSC channel is allotted, the

Commission will make an exception to its decision to cease accepting

applications for new NTSC stations, and the accompanying allotment

Report and Order will specify the period of time for filing

applications.

14. The Commission stated that its decision to cease accepting

applications for new NTSC TV stations 30 days after publication of this

Further Notice in the Federal Register and new petitions for rule

making to add new NTSC allotments immediately, as indicated above, is

based on the need to preserve the available spectrum for use by new DTV

stations during the transition. The draft DTV Table provided herein was

developed on the assumption that the existing vacant NTSC allotments

for which no construction permit application is pending will be

deleted. It is necessary to delete these allotments in order to provide

a DTV allotment for all eligible broadcast stations. The Commission

also stated that it is necessary to terminate the licensing of new NTSC

as quickly as possible in order to begin the process of transitioning

to DTV service. To continue to accept new applications for NTSC

stations, now that the actual start of this new service is approaching,

could potentially prolong the transition process. The Commission

indicated that the additional 30 day period it has provided for filing

new applications for NTSC construction permits will accommodate any

parties who may be in the process of preparing such applications now.

Accordingly, as allowed under Section 553 (b) and (d) of the

Administrative Procedures Act, the Commission found that there is good

cause for implementing these new policies without a notice and comment

procedure and that such a procedure would be contrary to its efforts to

implement DTV service.

15. With regard to modifications of existing stations, the

Commission stated that it is concerned that the service area

replications to be provided by the draft Table set forth herein could

be substantially affected if stations make changes to their technical

operations, i.e., maximum effective radiated power (ERP), antenna

height above average terrain (HAAT), and transmitter locations from

this point on. Furthermore, continuing changes in station operations

could affect broadcasters ability to comment meaningfully on the

proposed Table and our ability to finalize the DTV Table of Allotments.

The Commission indicated, however, that it is also concerned that

freezing modifications to existing NTSC stations could pose hardships

for broadcasters. The Commission noted that in many cases it may be

possible to permit modification of existing stations without affecting

the DTV Table. It therefore stated that it will continue to permit the

filing of applications to modify the technical facilities, i.e., ERP,

HAAT or transmitter location, of existing or authorized NTSC TV

stations. However, in order to preserve our ability to develop the DTV

Table, the Commission stated that it will henceforth condition the

grant of applications for modifications of technical facilities,

including those for applications on file before the date of the

adoption of this Further Notice but granted after that date, on the

outcome of its final decision on the DTV Table of Allotments. To the

extent that an existing station's service or potential for causing

interference are extended into new areas by grant of an application,

the condition may require the station's authorized facilities to be

reduced or modified. The Commission is seeking comment on whether this

condition should involve different consequences for applications for

modifications on file as of the date of adoption of this Further

Notice, as opposed to such applications filed after that date.

Procedural Matters

16. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415

and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR Sections 1.415 and 1.419,

interested parties may file comments on or before November 22, 1996,

and reply comments on or before December 23, 1996. To file formally in

this proceeding, you must file an original and five copies of all

comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want each

Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file

an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply

comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available

for public inspection during regular business hours in the Dockets

Reference Room of the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. You may also file comments electronically

via the internet at [email protected].

17. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA) of the expected significant economic impact on small entities by

the policies and rules proposed in this Further Notice of Proposed Rule

Making in MM Docket No. 87-268. Written public comments are requested

on the IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and

must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Further Notice

provided above in Section X.

Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rule: In this rule making

action the Commission presents proposals for the policies, procedures

and technical criteria that it will use in allotting channels for

broadcast digital television (DTV), plans for the recovery of a portion

of the spectrum currently allocated to TV broadcasting, and a draft DTV

Table of Allotments. The objective of this action is to obtain comment

and information that will assist the Commission in allotting DTV

channels. The Commission seeks to allot DTV channels in a manner that

is most efficient for broadcasters and the public and least disruptive

to broadcast television service during the period of transition from

NTSC to DTV service and to recover spectrum.

Legal Basis: The proposed action is authorized under Sections 4(i),

7, 301, 302, 303 and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,

47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 301, 302, 303 and 307.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which the

Rules Will Apply

(1) Definition of a ``Small Business''

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, small entities may include

small organizations, small businesses, and small governmental

jurisdictions. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601(6). The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. Sec. 601(3) generally defines the term ``small business'' as

having the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under

the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 632. A small business concern is

one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant

in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria

established by the Small Business Administration (``SBA''). According

to the SBA's regulations, entities engaged in television broadcasting

may have a maximum of $10.5 million in annual receipts in order to

qualify as a small business concern. 13 CFR 121.201. This

[[Page 43212]]

standard also applies in determining whether an entity is a small

business for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601(3), the statutory definition of a

small business applies ``unless an agency after consultation with the

Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after

opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of

such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and

publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' While we

tentatively believe that the foregoing definition of ``small business''

greatly overstates the number of television broadcast stations that are

small businesses and is not suitable for purposes of determining the

impact of the new rules on small business, we did not propose an

alternative definition in the IRFA. Accordingly, for purposes of this

Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, we utilize the SBA's definition

in determining the number of small businesses to which the rules apply,

but we reserve the right to adopt a more suitable definition of ``small

business'' as applied to television broadcast stations and to consider

further the issue of the number of small entities that are television

broadcasters in the future. Further, in this IRFA, we will identify the

different classes of small television stations that may be impacted by

the rules adopted in this Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making.

(2) Issues in Applying the Definition of a ``Small Business''

The SBA has defined ``annual receipts'' specifically in 13 CFR part

104, and its calculations include an averaging process. We do not

currently require submission of financial data from licensees that we

could use to apply the SBA's definition of a small business. Thus, for

purposes of estimating the number of small entities to which the rules

apply, we are limited to considering the revenue data that are publicly

available, and the revenue data on which we rely may not correspond

completely with the SBA definition of annual receipts.

Under SBA criteria for determining annual receipts, if a concern

has acquired an affiliate or been acquired as an affiliate during the

applicable averaging period for determining annual receipts, the annual

receipts in determining size status include the receipts of both firms.

13 CFR 121.104(d)(1). The SBA defines affiliation in 13 CFR 121.103.

While the Commission refers to an affiliate generally as a station

affiliated with a network, the SBA's definition of affiliate is

analogous to our attribution rules. Generally, under the SBA's

definition, concerns are affiliates of each other when one concern

controls or has the power to control the other, or a third party or

parties controls or has the power to control both. 13 CFR

121.103(a)(1). The SBA considers factors such as ownership, management,

previous relationships with or ties to another concern, and contractual

relationships, in determining whether affiliation exists. 13 CFR

121.103(a)(2). Instead of making an independent determination of

whether television stations were affiliated based on SBA's definitions,

we relied on the industry data bases available to us to afford us that

information.

(3) Estimates Based on Census and BIA Data

According to the Census Bureau, in 1992, there were 1,155 out of

1,478 operating television stations with revenues of less than ten

million dollars. This represents 78 percent of all television stations,

including non-commercial stations. See 1992 Census of Transportation,

Communications, and Utilities, Establishment and Firm Size, May 1995,

at 1-25. The Census Bureau does not separate the revenue data by

commercial and non-commercial stations in this report. Neither does it

allow us to determine the number of stations with a maximum of 10.5

million dollars in annual receipts. Census data also indicates that 81

percent of operating firms (that owned at least one television station)

had revenues of less than $10 million.

We have also performed a separate study based on the data contained

in the BIA Publications, Inc. Master Access Television Analyzer

Database, which lists a total of 1,141 full-power commercial television

stations. It should be noted that the percentage figures derived from

the data base may be underinclusive because the data base does not list

revenue estimates for noncommercial educational stations, and these are

therefore excluded from our calculations based on the data base. Non-

commercial stations would be subject to the allotment rules and

policies proposed herein. The data indicate that, based on 1995 revenue

estimates, 440 full-power commercial television stations had an

estimated revenue of 10.5 million dollars or less. That represents 54

percent of commercial television stations with revenue estimates listed

in the BIA program. The data base does not list estimated revenues for

331 stations. Using a worst case scenario, if those 331 stations for

which no revenue is listed are counted as small stations, there would

be a total of 771 stations with an estimated revenue of 10.5 million

dollars or less, representing approximately 68 percent of the 1,141

commercial television stations listed in the BIA data base.

Alternatively, if we look at owners of commercial television

stations as listed in the BIA data base, there are a total of 488

owners. The data base lists estimated revenues for 60 percent of these

owners, or 295. Of these 295 owners, 158 or 54 percent had annual

revenues of $10.5 million or less. Using a worst case scenario, if the

193 owners for which revenue is not listed are assumed to be small, the

total of small entities would constitute 72 percent of owners.

In summary, based on the foregoing worst case analysis using census

data, we estimate that our rules will apply to as many as 1,155

commercial and non-commercial television stations (78 percent of all

stations) that could be classified as small entities. Using a worst

case analysis based on the data in the BIA data base, we estimate that

as many as approximately 771 commercial television stations (about 68

percent of all commercial television stations) could be classified as

small entities. As we noted above, these estimates are based on a

definition that we believe greatly overstates the number of television

broadcasters that are small businesses. Further, it should be noted

that under the SBA's definitions, revenues of affiliates that are not

television stations should be aggregated with the television station

revenues in determining whether a concern is small. The estimates

overstate the number of small entities since the revenue figures on

which they are based do not include or aggregate such revenues from

non-television affiliated companies.

The proposed DTV Table of Allotments would also affect low power

television (LPTV) and TV translator stations. The Commission's records

indicate that currently, there are about 1,750 licensed LPTV stations

and 5,050 licensed TV translators. The Commission has also issued about

1,400 construction permits for new LPTV stations. We do not collect

individual station financial data for low power television (LPTV)

Stations and TV translator stations. However, based on its experience

with LPTV and TV translator stations, the Commission believes that all

such stations have revenues of less than $10.5 million. We also seek

information on the number of low power stations that operate

commercially and noncommercially.

[[Page 43213]]

(4) Alternative Classification of Small Stations

An alternative way to classify small television stations is by the

number of employees. The Commission currently applies a standard based

on the number of employees in administering its Equal Employment

Opportunity Rule (EEO) for broadcasting. Thus, radio or television

stations with fewer than five full-time employees are exempted from

certain EEO reporting and recordkeeping requirements. We estimate that

the total numbers of commercial and noncommercial television stations

with 4 or fewer employees are 132 and 136, respectively.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements: The proposals set forth in this action would

involve no changes to reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance

requirements beyond what is already required under the current

regulations.

Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These

Rules: None.

Significant Alternatives to Proposed Rules Which Minimize

Significant Economic Impact of Small Entities and Accomplish Stated

Objectives: The DTV Table of Allotments proposed in this action will

affect all of the commercial and noncommercial broadcast television

stations eligible for a DTV channel in the transition period and a

significant number of the low power and TV translator stations. It is

expected that the proposed allotments will constitute the population of

channels on which broadcasters will operate DTV service in the future.

Allotment of these channels is therefore expected to be very important

to the broadcast community. All of the affected stations will have to

obtain new transmission facilities and, to a varying extent, production

equipment to operate on the new DTV channels. The cost of equipment to

operate on these new channels is expected to vary from $750,000 upwards

to $10 million. The actual cost of equipment is expected to vary in

accordance with the degree to which the station becomes involved in DTV

programming and origination.

The proposed DTV Table of Allotments will also affect low power

television (LPTV) and TV translator stations. Total investment in the

LPTV and TV translator facilities is estimated to be about $150-$250

million. Studies by the FCC staff indicate that there is not sufficient

spectrum to accommodate both low power stations and DTV stations. These

studies estimate that up to about one-third of all LPTV stations and

one-quarter of all TV translators may have to cease operation to make

way for DTV stations. In general, most LPTV stations within major

markets will be affected, while rural operations will be affected to

lesser degrees. In this regard, we note that, at our December 12, 1995,

en banc meeting on digital television, Mr. Sherwin Grossman of the

Community Broadcasters Association expressed concern about the impact

that implementation of DTV service would have on the low power TV

industry. He argued that to avoid affecting low power TV service we

should pick a date or range of dates and require all existing stations

to convert to DTV service, rather than giving them a second channel,

and that we should not look to recover TV spectrum until everyone who

needs broadcast service is able to receive it. Similarly, Abacus

Television (Abacus), in comments submitted in response to our Fourth

Further Notice and Third Notice of Inquiry in this proceeding, 60 FR

42130 (August 15, 1995), argued that we should attempt to protect low

power stations in order to protect the unique and diverse services that

low power stations provide the public.

The process of creating DTV channel allotments is an optimization

task that offers a great number of possible alternative ``mixes'' of

channel allotments for each community. In evaluating the merits of

allotment alternatives, the Commission intends to make every effort to

accommodate the needs and concerns of all affected parties. We also

intend to consider negotiated allotment/assignment agreements submitted

by broadcasters. We expect that the final Table that is adopted will

contain a number of revisions of the allotments proposed herein.

As indicated above, we also intend to consider policies for

minimizing the impact of our DTV allotment and spectrum recovery

proposals on low power stations. In particular, we are proposing to

permit displaced low power stations to apply for a suitable replacement

channel in the same area without being subject to competing

applications. We will also permit low power stations to operate until a

displacing DTV station or new service provider is operational. Further,

we are proposing to allow low power stations to file non-window

displacement relief applications to change their operating parameters

to cure or prevent interference caused to or received from a DTV

station or other protected service. Finally, we intend to explore other

possibilities that would preserve access to LPTV programming. One

approach would be to require DTV stations to devote a portion of their

channel capacity to the carriage of local LPTV stations that are

displaced. Another approach would be to require that all full service

broadcasters in a market agree on some arrangement for the carriage of

the programming of displaced LPTV stations during the transition.

We recognize that in addition to the costs incurred to upgrade

engineering and technical operations from analog to digital

transmission, small stations will also incur costs to promote their new

channel identification. Such costs may include: advertising and

publicity on-air and additional media; changes to the signage mounted

in studio and newsroom sets; channel identification on vehicles,

camera/video equipment and accessories; graphic design, typesetting and

printing costs for new stationary and paper products; and the

production of sales marketing and promotional materials. We seek

comment on the type of modifications, production and costs necessary to

facilitate a transition to a new channel and the economic impact these

expenses will have on small commercial and noncommercial television

stations. We seek comment on whether the Commission should adopt

measures that will assist small stations (as classified under either

the SBA definition or their number of employees) in their transition,

either in their cost to upgrade technical operations or new channel

identification. If such measures should be taken, please provide

recommendations and state with particularity what class of small

stations should be the beneficiaries of such proposals.

It is possible that there may be some small stations that will be

required to move a second time, and will incur additional costs, within

a relatively short period of time, to promote their new DTV channel

identification. We seek comments on how to minimize or offset these

additional costs to a small station who is also subjected to a second

move.

Ordering Clauses

18. In accordance with the proposals and actions described herein,

it is ordered, that the Commission will not accept additional

applications for new NTSC stations that are filed after 30 days from

the date of publication of this Further Notice in the Federal Register.

The Commission will continue to process applications for new NTSC

stations that are currently on file and any new such applications that

are filed

[[Page 43214]]

on or before 30 days from the date of publication of this Further

Notice in the Federal Register in accordance with procedures and

standards indicated herein. In addition, it is ordered that, effective

immediately as of the close of business on the date of adoption of this

Further Notice, the Commission will not accept any additional Petitions

for Rule Making proposing to amend the existing TV Table of Allotments

in Section 73.606(b) of its rules to add an allotment for a new NTSC

station. It is further ordered that, effective immediately as of the

close of business on the date of adoption of this Further Notice, the

Commission will condition the grant of any modifications of the

technical parameters of existing full service NTSC stations on the

outcome of this rule making proceeding.

19. This action is being taken pursuant to authority contained in

Sections 4(i), 7, 301, 302, 303 and 307 of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 301, 302, 303 and

307. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rule making

proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the

Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the

Commission's rules. See generally 47 CFR Sections 1.1202, 1.1203, and

1.1206(a).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television.

Federal Communications Commission

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96-21261 Filed 8-20-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P