MDS and ITFS Two-Way Transmissions

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 21 and 74

[MM Docket No. 97-217; DA 97-2547]

MDS and ITFS Two-Way Transmissions

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: In this Order Extending Time for Filing Comments and Reply

Comments (``Order''), comment is sought on additional proposals for

amendment of the Commission's rules to enable Multipoint Distribution

Service (``MDS'') and Instructional Television Fixed Service (``ITFS'')

licensees to engage in fixed two-way transmissions. In addition, the

comment period in this docket is extended in order to allow for proper

consideration of the proposals.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before January 8, 1998, and reply

comments on or before February 9, 1998. Written comments by the public

on the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis are due January 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,

1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Jacobs, (202) 418-7066 or

[[Page 65781]]

Dave Roberts, (202) 418-1600, Video Services Division, Mass Media

Bureau.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Order

Extending Time for Filing Comments and Reply Comments, MM Docket No.

97-217, adopted and released December 5, 1997. The full text of this

Order is available for inspection and copying during normal business

hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's copy

contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857-3800,

1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

Synopsis of Order Extending Time for Filing Comments and Reply

Comments

1. This Order was issued in response to a request filed by the

Catholic Television Network (``CTN'') for a supplemental period to

comment on the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this

docket. MDS and ITFS Two-Way Transmissions, 62 FR 60025 (Nov. 6, 1997),

as corrected, 62 FR 60750 (Nov. 12, 1997). Expressing concern that the

proposed rules would create a potential for ``brute force overload''

interference from response stations to nearby non-co- nor adjacent

channel ITFS receive sites, CTN argued that a two-way system should be

implemented only if sufficient frequency separation is provided between

``downstream'' and ``upstream'' transmissions. CTN proposed to

``refarm'' the E, F, G and H channel groups to create a band of

contiguous ITFS spectrum at 2500-2620 MHz and a band of contiguous

spectrum for response transmissions at 2644-2690 MHz, making available

up to 24 MHz for downstream MDS operations as a guard band. ITFS G

channel licensees would be allowed to (i) consent to their channels

being used as response channels, so long as they satisfy ITFS

programming requirements on other system channels; (ii) request

relocation of some or all of their channels to vacant or vacated ITFS

frequencies, or to MDS Channels E1-2 and F1-2; or (iii) enter into a

shared-time agreement with another ITFS licensee, under which both

licensees could use the G channels as response channels and the

partner's channels for ITFS programming requirements. CTN added that

the 125 KHz channels should be reallocated to ITFS and used only as

response channels. CTN suggested that its proposal would reduce harmful

interference potential, encourage efficient spectrum usage, and

preserve the spectrum reservation for ITFS.

2. The parties who commenced this proceeding (``Petitioners'')

filed a response countering that other solutions to brute force

interference may be more efficient, such as rendering the response hub

licensee responsible to either cure any brute force interference to

protected ITFS receive sites or to cease operating the offending

transceiver. Regarding CTN's proposal, Petitioners disagreed with its

limits on the location of response channels, and further disagreed that

refarming only should occur where the ITFS G channels licensee

voluntarily agrees.

3. Given the recent submission of CTN's proposal and its potential

importance to this proceeding, and the complexity of CTN's proposal and

of the other issues involved in this proceeding, interested parties are

afforded an additional 30 days in which to file comments and reply

comments.

4. Authority. This Order is issued pursuant to authority contained

in Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 USC Secs. 154(i) and 303(r), and Secs. 0.204(b), 0.283, and

1.45 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.204(b), 0.283, and 1.45.

Federal Communications Commission.

Roy J. Stewart,

Chief, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97-32800 Filed 12-15-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P