**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Amendment of Section 73.622(b), ) MM Docket No. 99-268

Table of Allotments, ) RM-9691

Digital Television Broadcast Stations. )

(Chattanooga, Tennessee) )

**[REPORT AND ORDER]{.underline}**

**(Proceeding Terminated)**

**Adopted: February 15, 2001 Released: February 16, 2001**

By the Chief, Video Services Division:

1\. At the request of Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. (\"Sarkes\"), licensee of
station WRCB-TV, NTSC channel 3, Chattanooga, Tennessee, the Commission
has before it the [Notice of Proposed Rule Making]{.underline}
(\"*Notice*\"), 14 FCC Rcd 13304 (1999), proposing the substitution of
DTV channel 13 for station WRCB-TV\'s assigned DTV channel 55. Sarkes
filed comments reaffirming its intention to apply for DTV channel 13, if
allotted. Reply comments were filed by Media General Broadcasting, Inc.,
licensee of station WDEF(TV), NTSC channel 12, Chattanooga,
Tennessee.[^1]

2\. Media General filed reply comments stating that Sarkes\' proposal to
substitute DTV channels at Chattanooga should not be granted because
WRCB-DT antenna pattern is in excess of Section 73.685(e) of the
Commission\'s Rules. More importantly, Media General asserts that since
Sarkes\' channel substitution is adjacent to WDEF(TV)\'s analog
operations, it claims that adoption of Sarkes\' proposed channel change
would create predicted interference to 634 persons in WDEF(TV)\'s
viewing area. While Media General acknowledges that at this level of
interference, the Sarkes\' proposal still would comply with the
Commission\'s *de minimis* standard under Section 73.623(C0(2), it
states it has concern about the potential for greater interference. It
notes that there has been little field testing of VHF upper-adjacent
channel interference, and the pertinent interference protection ratio is
based upon picture degradation more appropriate for outlying areas-not
the central population regions for which WDEF(TV) would be subject to
adjacent channel interference.

3\. In response, Sarkes believes that the Commission should strike Media
General\'s reply comments because it did not file comments by the
deadline fixed by the *Notice* adopted by the Commission in this
proceeding. Sarkes states that Media General has filed its reply
comments in a manner which precludes Sarkes\' opportunity to respond to
the objections raised therein and, should be struck as an abuse of
Commission process. Furthermore, Sarkes asserts that the reply comments
attempt to advance a counterproposal in this proceeding in direct
violation of Section 1.410(d) of the Commission\'s rules. Sarkes also
states that NTSC directional antenna rules do not apply to DTV operation
and Media General\'s claim of interference is speculative.

[DISCUSSION]{.underline}

4\. We find that Media General reply comments are directed solely to
issues raised in the *Notice* and thus we consider them untimely filed
initial comments. Section 1.415(c) of the Commission\'s Rules regarding
comment and replies to a notice of proposed rule making, clearly states
that initial comments are designed to provide a reasonable time to
respond to issues raised in the *Notice.* Reply comments are designed to
provide a reasonable time for parties to respond to issues raised in
original comments. In this case, Media General has filed comments that
clearly dealt with the technical parameters of Sarkes\' proposal which
were delineated in the *Notice* and as a result should have filed its
comments during the initial comment cycle. We believe acceptance of
Media General\'s reply comments would disserve the public interest and
would encourage the filing of additional untimely pleadings without any
offsetting public benefits. Therefore, pursuant to Section 1.415 of the
Commission\'s Rules we will dismiss Media General\'s reply comments as
untimely.[^2]

5\. Since this case does not present any technical interference
concerns, we believe the public interest would be served by substituting
DTV channel 13 for DTV channel 55 because it will permit station WRCB-TV
to operate on a core allotment in lieu of its current non-core
assignment. DTV channel 13 can be allotted to Chattanooga, Tennessee, as
proposed, in compliance with the principle community coverage
requirements of Section 73.625(a) at coordinates (35-09-40 N. and
85-18-52 W.). In addition, we find that this channel is acceptable under
the 2 percent criterion for *de minimis* impact that is applied in
evaluating requests for modification of initial DTV allotments under
Section 73.623(c)(2) for Station WRCB-TV with the following
specifications:

DTV DTV power Antenna DTV Service

[State & City]{.underline} [Channel]{.underline} [(kW)]{.underline}
[HAAT (m)]{.underline} [Pop. (thous.)]{.underline}

TN Chattanooga 13 37.0 325 915

6\. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i),
5(c)(1), 303(g) and (r) and 307(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, and Sections 0.61, 0.204(b) and 0.283 of the Commission\'s
Rules, IT IS ORDERED, That effective April 2, 2001, the DTV Table of
Allotments, Section 73.622(b) of the Commission\'s Rules, IS AMENDED,
with respect to the community listed below, to read as follows:

[City]{.underline} [Channel No.]{.underline}

Chattanooga, Tennessee 13, \*29, 35,

40, 47

7\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That within 45 days of the effective date of
this *[Order]{.underline}*, Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. shall submit to the
Commission a minor change application for a construction permit (FCC
Form 301) specifying DTV Channel 13 in lieu of DTV Channel 55 for
station WRCB-TV.

8\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That this proceeding IS TERMINATED.

9\. For further information concerning this proceeding, contact Pam
Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-1600.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Barbara A. Kreisman

Chief, Video Services Division

Mass Media Bureau

[^1]: After the pleading cycle closed the following pleadings were
    received: Reply comments of Media General Broadcasting, Inc.
    (\"Media General\"), \"Motion to Strike, or in the Alternative ,
    Motion for Leave to File Accompanying Opposition to Reply\", filed
    by Sarkes; \"Motion to Leave to Submit Opposition\" and \"Opposition
    to Motion to Strike\", filed by Media General; and \"Reply to
    Opposition to Motion to Strike, or in the Alternative, Motion for
    Leave to File Accompanying Reply Comments\", filed by Sarkes.

[^2]: Even if we were to considered Media General\'s reply comments, our
    engineering analysis indicates that station WRCB-TV operating on DTV
    channel 13 with a power of 37.0 does not violate any of the
    Commission\'s rules. Furthermore, Media General reliance on Section
    73.685(e) is misplaced. Section 73.685(e) is applied only to NTSC
    directional proposals, while Section 73.625(c) is the correct rule
    section for DTV directional proposals which contains no constraint
    on maximum-to-minimum ratios for directional antennas used for DTV
    operations.