**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Amendment of Section 73.622(b), ) MM Docket No. 00-117

Table of Allotments, ) RM-9810

Digital Television Broadcast Stations. )

(Salem, Oregon) )

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

**(Proceeding Terminated)**

**Adopted: February 1, 2002 Released: February 6, 2002**

By the Chief, Video Services Division:

1\. At the request of Paxson Salem License, Inc. (\"Paxson\"), licensee
of station KPXG(TV), NTSC channel 22, Salem, Oregon, the Commission has
before it the [Notice of Proposed Rule Making]{.underline}, 15 FCC Rcd
11362 (2000), proposing the substitution of DTV channel 4 for its
assigned DTV channel 20. Paxson filed comments restating its intention
to construct and operate station KPXG-DT on channel 4. ACME Television
Licenses of Oregon, LLC (\"ACME\"), licensee of KWBP(TV), Salem, Oregon,
and licensee of low power television station KWBP-LP, channel 4,
Reedville, Oregon, filed comments in opposition. Paxson filed responsive
comments.

2\. ACME states that the Paxson proposal fails to provide a 55 dBu city
grade field strength contour over all of Salem, Oregon, and fails to
replicate the existing NTSC service area of KPXG(TV). ACME also claims
that adoption of the Paxson proposal would displace the service of
KWBP-LP located in Reedville, Oregon. It notes that Paxson proposes to
change site and moved toward KWBP-LP, which is only 12.4 kilometers from
the DTV site specified in Paxson\'s proposal. ACME states that its low
power station provides WB Network, syndicated and local programming to
persons residing in the City of Portland, Oregon, and the surrounding
area, who are unable to satisfactorily receive that programming over the
air from KWBP(TV). ACME submits that it acquired KWBP-LP based on the
Commission\'s original formulation of the DTV Table of Allotments, which
preserved the service provided by KWBP-LP. ACME claims it invested
considerable resources, in excess of \$250,000, in improving KWBP-LP\'s
service to the public. It also argues that Paxson has failed to explain
how the public interest will be served by the loss of service currently
provided by both KPXG(TV) and KWBP-LP. Finally, ACME suggests that if
the Commission considers Paxson\'s proposal, its adoption ought to be
conditioned on location and assignment of a equivalent replacement
channel for KWBP-LP and reimbursement by Paxson to ACME of all the
associated costs resulting from the modification of KWBP-LP.

3\. In response, Paxson states that its proposal would permit KPXG-DT to
improve over-the-air DTV service by permitting its station to co-locate
with KOIN-TV, a move that is precluded by the use DTV channel 20. Paxson
argues that the other digital station allotted to Salem, ACME\'s
KWBP-DT, is not precluded and similarly has applied to relocate to the
KOIN-TV tower.[^1] Paxson notes that in its petition it claimed that the
grant of its channel change would result in no net loss of lower power
stations. KPXG-DT\'s proposed allotment, according to Paxson, would
displace ACME\'s recently acquired low power station (KWBP-LP), but
KPXG-DT\'s initial allotment on channel 20 would displace K20DD located
at Albany, Oregon. To this end, its states that whether or not the
Commission grants its proposal, one secondary station will be displaced,
either KWBP-LP or K20DD, a result the Commission approved when it
initially allotting channel 20 to KPXG-DT. Further, Paxson maintains
that the Commission when implementing digital television, has
\"explicitly, continuously, and notoriously affirmed the secondary
status of LPTV and TV translator stations.\"[^2] Nevertheless, Paxson
argues, that the Commission adopted numerous mitigating administrative
and technical measures designed to create additional vacancies to which
displaced stations could relocate, noting that ACME has not avail itself
of such a remedy.[^3] It also refutes ACME\'s claim that the Commission
should condition Paxson\'s grant upon AMCE finding a replacement channel
as well as, reimbursement for the associated costs. It states that AMCE
has failed to cite any authority for the imposition of such a burden on
Paxson, arguing that the Commission has explicitly addressed the issue
of reimbursement, stating it that was not \"appropriate to require
broadcaster to implement DTV and at the same time require them to
compensate secondary low power stations that are affected by this
required implementation.\" Finally, Paxson disputes ACME\'s claim that
its proposed channel change will not satisfy the Commission\'s principal
community coverage requirement. Paxson states that its technical study
shows that 55 dBu service is provided to all of KPXG-DT\'s community of
license. And, the proposed operation of KPXG-DT on channel 4 would
provide better replication than the proposed facilities of KWBP-DT,
which would be located at the same site. Paxson finally argues that the
adoption of its proposal will serve the public interest and result in a
more efficient us of the broadcast spectrum.

4\. We believe the public interest would be served by adopting Paxson\'s
proposal since it would permit station KPXG(TV) to co-locate its digital
facility with station KOIN-TV as the Commission has encouraged DTV
applicants to do for a variety of reasons. Moreover, we find that ACME
has not raised an reason for denying Paxson\'s request. In essence, ACME
raises the same concerns that were addressed in the Commission\'s *Sixth
Report and Order* and *Review of the Commission\'s Rules and Policies
Affecting the Conversion Digital Television (\" DTV Biennial Review\")
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making*[^4]. There,
the Commission decided that it will not require replication in order to
give broadcasters flexibility to collocate their antennas at common
sites in order to minimize potential local difficulties in locating
towers and eliminating the cost of building new towers. Furthermore,
ACME\'s reliance on 55 dBu city grade coverage requirement is misplaced.
The Commission\'s city grade requirement as set forth in Section 73.625
requires a 28 dBu F(50,90) field strength contour to cover the principle
city, for channels between 2-6. In the *Notice of Proposed Rule Making*
in MM Docket No. 00-39, the Commission did propose a 55 dBu contour
requirement for a station\'s community of license, however, in the *DTV
Biennial Review* the Commission adopted a 35 dBu requirement instead,
effective December 31, 2004, for commercial stations and December 31,
2005, for non-commercial stations. Thus, contrary to ACME\'s claims,
Paxson\'s proposal does provide city grade coverage to the community of
Salem and station KWBP-LP is not entitled to any preferential treatment
other than what it normally afforded to all secondary services. We find
that Paxson\'s justification for its channel substitution serves the
Commission\'s goal of allowing broadcasters some flexibility so that
they may expeditiously continue to build out and met the DTV
construction deadlines.

5\. DTV channel 4 can be allotted to Salem, Oregon, in compliance with
the principle community coverage requirements of Section 73.625(a) at
coordinates (45-30-58 N. and 122-43-59 W.). Since the community Salem is
located within 400 kilometers of the U.S.-Canadian border, concurrence
by the Canadian government has been obtained for this allotment. 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 KPXG-DT with the following specifications:

DTV DTV power Antenna DTV Service

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

OR Salem 4 17.0 455 2040

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 March 25, 2002, 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}

Salem, Oregon 4, 33c

7\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That within 45 days of the effective date of
this *[Order]{.underline}*, Paxson Salem License, Inc. shall submit to
the Commission a minor change application for a construction permit (FCC
Form 301) specifying DTV Channel 4 in lieu of DTV Channel 20 for station
KPXG(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]: Paxson cites *FCC File No. BPCDT-19981007KE*.

[^2]: Citing, *Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the
    Existing Television Broadcast Service*, *Sixth Report and Order
    (\"Sixth Report and Order\")*, MM Docket No. 87-268, 12 FCC Rcd
    14588(1997), *Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the
    Sixth Report and Order*, 13 FCC Rcd 7418 (1998), and *Second
    Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Fifth and
    Sixth Report and Orders*, 14 FCC Rcd 1348 (1998).

[^3]: Paxson also notes that the Commission ruled that KWBP-LP did not
    qualify for Class A status pursuant to *Public Notice*, DA 00-1227,
    released June 9, 2000.

[^4]: *See 16 FCC Rcd 5946 (2001).*