15180 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

and that the effectiveness of the 

Commission’s actions in mitigating that 

crisis is likely to be sharply reduced by 

delay. The Bureau seeks comment on 

this proposal. 

Procedural Matters 

50. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Analysis. This document contains 

proposed new or modified information 

collection requirements. As part of the 

Commission’s continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork burdens, the 

Commission invites the general public 

and OMB to comment on the 

information collection requirements 

contained in this document, as required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

pursuant to the Small Business 

Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public 

Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), 

the Commission seeks specific comment 

on how the Commission might further 

reduce the information collection 

burden for small business concerns with 

fewer than 25 employees. 

51. Ex Parte Rules. Proceedings in this 

Notice shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ 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 these proceedings should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54 

Communications common carriers, 

Internet, Libraries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Schools, 

Telecommunications. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Cheryl Callahan, 

Assistant Chief, Telecommunications Access 

Policy Division Wireline Competition Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 2021–05887 Filed 3–18–21; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 21–60; RM–11884; DA 21– 

203; FR ID 17521] 

Television Broadcasting Services 

Superior and York, Nebraska 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission has before it 

a petition for rulemaking filed by Gray 

Television Licensee, LLC (Gray or 

Licensee), the licensee of television 

station KSNB–TV, channel 4, Superior, 

Nebraska, requesting an amendment of 

the DTV Table of Allotments to delete 

VHF channel 4 at Superior, Nebraska 

and allot it to York, Nebraska, and 

substitute UHF channel 24 at York for 

channel 4. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before April 21, 2021 and reply 

comments on or before May 6, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45 

L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In 

addition to filing comments with the 

FCC, interested parties should serve 

counsel for petitioner as follows: Joan 

Stewart, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, 1776 K 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at (202) 

418–1647 or Joyce.Bernstein@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: According 

to Gray, problems with the reception of 

low-band digital channels are well 

known, and many viewers who receive 

a predicted principal community signal 

from KSNB–TV on channel 4 are unable 

to receive a reliable over-the-air signal, 

particularly when using indoor 

antennas. Gray also applied to co-locate 

KSNB–TV with commonly-owned 

KOLN, Lincoln, Nebraska, a move of 

approximately 23.5 kilometers, and a 

change in community from Superior to 

York is necessary for KSNB–TV to make 

that move because it cannot put the 

required principal community signal 

over Superior from a channel 24 facility 

on the KOLN tower. 

Gray asserts that York qualifies as a 

community for allotment purposes, has 

no local television allotment, and is the 

largest community in York County. 

Petitioner further asserts that while 

Superior will lose its only local 

television allotment, York is more 

deserving of an allotment, given its size 

and community and economic 

attributes. Thus, Gray seeks a waiver of 

the Commission policy that the removal 

of a community’s first local service is 

presumptively inconsistent with the 

public interest except in the rare 

instance where removal might serve the 

public interest. Gray further requests a 

waiver of § 1.420(i) of the rules which 

provides that the Commission may 

modify a station’s community of license 

without affording competing 

expressions of interest, where the 

modified facility is mutually exclusive; 

the channel 24 proposal at York is not 

mutually exclusive with KSNB–TV’s 

current licensed operation on channel 4 

at Superior. 

The NPRM proposes to grant both 

requested waivers and seeks comment 

on those proposals. York is a larger 

community than Superior and allowing 

KSNB–TV to colocate with KOLN on 

channel 24 will result in important 

public benefits. In addition, the NPRM 

proposes to grant a waiver of § 1.420 of 

the rules; Gray has demonstrated that 

multiple channels are potentially 

available for future allotment in and 

around Superior, so that future 

applicants will not be deprived of the 

opportunity to apply for a station in the 

area if Gray’s proposal is not opened for 

competing expressions of interest. 

This is a synopsis of the 

Commission’s Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 21–69; 

RM–11884; DA 21–203, adopted 

February 22, 2021, and released 

February 22, 2021. The full text of this 

document is available for download at 

https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request 

materials in accessible formats (braille, 

large print, computer diskettes, or audio 

recordings), please send an email to 

FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Government Affairs Bureau at (202) 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15181 

418–0530 (VOICE), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

This document does not contain 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

proposed information collection burden 

‘‘for small business concerns with fewer 

than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601– 

612, do not apply to this proceeding. 

Members of the public should note 

that all ex parte contacts are prohibited 

from the time a notice of proposed 

rulemaking is issued to the time the 

matter is no longer subject to 

Commission consideration or court 

review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, 

however, exceptions to this prohibition, 

which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a). 

See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the 

Commission’s rules for information 

regarding the proper filing procedures 

for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Television. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Thomas Horan, 

Chief of Staff, Media Bureau. 

Proposed Rule 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 73 as follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 

307, 309, 310, 334, 336, and 339. 

■ 2. In § 73.622(i), amend the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments 

under Nebraska by revising the entry for 

Superior, and adding, in alphabetical 

order, an entry for York to read as 

follows: 

§ 73.622 Digital television table of 

allotments. 

* * * * * 

(i) Post-Transition Table of DTV 

Allotments. 

Community Channel No. 

* * * * * 

Nebraska 

Community Channel No. 

* * * * * 

Superior .................... ....................................

York ........................... 24 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–04769 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 21–73; RM–11889; DA 21– 

270; FR ID 17558] 

Television Broadcasting Services 

Toledo, Ohio 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Video Division has before 

it a petition for rulemaking filed 

November 27, 2020 (Petition) by 

Dominion Broadcasting, Inc. 

(Petitioner), the licensee of WLMB 

(IND), channel 5, Toledo, Ohio (WLMB 

or Station). The Petitioner requests the 

substitution of channel 35 for channel 5 

at Toledo, Ohio in the DTV Table of 

Allotments. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before April 21, 2021 and reply 

comments on or before May 6, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45 

L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In 

addition to filing comments with the 

FCC, interested parties should serve 

counsel for petitioner as follows: Joseph 

C. Chautin, III, Esq., Hardy, Carey, 

Chautin & Balkin, LLP, 1080 West 

Causeway Approach, Mandeville, LA 

70471. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shaun Maher, Video Division, Media 

Bureau, at (202) 418–2324 or 

Shaun.Maher@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 

21–73; RM–11889; DA 21–270, adopted 

March 4, 2021, and released March 4, 

2021. The full text of this document is 

available for download at https://

www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials 

in accessible formats (braille, large 

print, computer diskettes, or audio 

recordings), please send an email to 

FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Government Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (VOICE), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

This document does not contain 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

proposed information collection burden 

‘‘for small business concerns with fewer 

than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601– 

612, do not apply to this proceeding. 

Members of the public should note 

that all ex parte contacts are prohibited 

from the time a notice of proposed 

rulemaking is issued to the time the 

matter is no longer subject to 

Commission consideration or court 

review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, 

however, exceptions to this prohibition, 

which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a). 

See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the 

Commission’s rules for information 

regarding the proper filing procedures 

for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. 

In support of its channel substitution 

request, the Petitioner states that, since 

the Station transitioned to channel 5 in 

2008 in conjunction with the 

Commission’s digital television 

transition, it has regularly received 

complaints from viewers unable to 

receive the Station’s over-the-air signal. 

Petitioner states that these issues have 

‘‘continued unabated’’ for twelve years. 

Petitioner further states that it ‘‘has been 

forced to constantly scramble to retain 

viewers with a variety of methods, some 

costly.’’ Petitioner maintains that these 

propagation problems have put WLMB 

at a distinct competitive disadvantage to 

the other stations broadcasting in the 

Toledo market. Petitioner states that the 

Commission has long since recognized 

that ‘‘VHF channels have certain 

characteristics that have posed 

challenges for their use in providing 

digital television service’’ and that the 

Station’s experience is no different. 

To remedy its propagation problems, 

Petitioner proposes substituting UHF 

channel 35 for VHF channel 5. 

Petitioner provides an Engineering 

Statement that it claims confirms that, 

with WLMB’s proposed parameters, 

including a 375 kW ERP, channel 35 can 

be substituted for channel 5 at Toledo, 

Ohio, in compliance with the 

Commission’s rules. Petitioner states 

that the proposed facility would 

continue to provide a principal 

community contour completely 

covering WLMB’s community of license 

and would not cause impermissible 

interference to any station. 

Petitioner contends that the 

Engineering Statement also confirms 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS