81488 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 

97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) 

Dated: December 7, 2010. 

Sandra K. Knight, 

Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation 

Administrator, Mitigation, Department of 

Homeland Security, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32542 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–12–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1 and 63 

[IB Docket No. 04–47; FCC 10–187] 

Modification of the Rules and 

Procedures Governing the Provision of 

International Telecommunications 

Service 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission amends its rules to grant in 

part the Petition for Reconsideration 

filed by the North American Submarine 

Cable Association (NASCA) and 

otherwise affirm the Commission’s 

Report and Order, Amendment of parts 

1 and 63 of the Commission’s Rules, IB 

Docket No. 04–47, Report and Order, 

FCC 07–118, 22 FCC Rcd 11398, 72 FR 

54363 (2007) (Report and Order), 

establishing that the Coastal Zone 

Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) 

applies to cable landing licenses granted 

by the Commission. NASCA’s Petition 

for Reconsideration argues that the 

Commission should rescind the rules 

adopted in that Report and Order. 

Although we decline to rescind the 

rules, we amend them to clarify the 

applicable licensing requirements and 

to ensure that the Commission’s process 

for evaluating cable landing licenses 

complies with the CZMA review 

procedures established by the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA). 

DATES: Effective January 27, 2011, 

except for the amendment to 

§ 1.767(k)(4), which contains 

information collection requirements that 

have not been approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). The 

Federal Communications Commission 

will publish a document in the Federal 

Register announcing the effective date 

of these rules after it receives OMB 

approval for the information collection 

requirements. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Cook or David Krech, Policy 

Division, International Bureau, FCC, 

(202) 418–1460 or via the Internet at 

Kimberly.Cook@fcc.gov and 

David.Krech@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Order on 

Reconsideration in IB Docket No. 04–47, 

FCC 10–187, adopted October 29, 2010, 

and released November 2, 2010. The full 

text of the Report and Order is available 

for inspection and copying during 

normal business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. The document 

also is available for download over the 

Internet at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/

edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10- 

187A1.pdf. The complete text also may 

be purchased from the Commission’s 

copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc. (BCPI), located in Room CY–B402, 

445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. Customers may contact BCPI at 

its Web site: http://www.bcpiweb.com or 

call 1–800–378–3160. 

Summary of Order on Reconsideration 

1. In the Order on Reconsideration, 

the Commission amends parts 1 and 63 

of its rules to grant in part the Petition 

for Reconsideration filed by the North 

American Submarine Cable Association 

(NASCA) and otherwise affirms the 

Commission’s Report and Order, 

Amendment of parts 1 and 63 of the 

Commission’s rules, IB Docket No. 04– 

47, Report and Order, FCC 07–118, 22 

FCC Rcd 11398, 72 FR 54363 (2007) 

(Report and Order), establishing that the 

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 

(CZMA) applies to cable landing 

licenses granted by the Commission. 

NASCA’s Petition for Reconsideration 

argues that the Commission should 

rescind the rules adopted in that Report 

and Order. Although the Commission 

declines to rescind the rules, the 

Commission amends them to clarify the 

applicable licensing requirements and 

to ensure that the Commission’s process 

for evaluating cable landing licenses 

complies with the CZMA review 

procedures established by the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA). 

2. Applicability of CZMA to FCC 

Cable Landing Licenses: The 

Commission reaffirms its finding the 

Report and Order that the CZMA 

applies to cable landing license 

applications. In a letter to the 

Commission, NOAA, the federal agency 

charged with implementation of CZMA, 

finds that an FCC license is a federal 

license or permit that could be reviewed 

by coastal states, pursuant to the CZMA. 

In deference to NOAA’s statutory and 

regulatory authority and in furtherance 

of the Commission’s cable landing 

licensing authority under the Cable 

Landing License Act, as delegated to the 

Commission by Executive Order 10530, 

the FCC must ensure that its cable 

landing license rules and application 

procedures comport with the 

consistency review procedures specified 

in the CZMA. 

3. The CZMA states that no federal 

agency may grant a license to conduct 

an activity affecting a coastal area until 

a state concurs or is presumed to concur 

with the applicant’s certification that a 

proposed activity is consistent with the 

state’s coastal management plan. See 16 

U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(A). If the state 

includes FCC cable landing licensing in 

its coastal management plan, FCC 

licensing is considered a ‘‘listed 

activity.’’ See 15 CFR 930.53. As such, 

the state has six months to review and 

either concur with or object to the 

certification that is required if CZMA 

state consistency review is triggered by 

the filing of a cable landing license with 

the Commission. The state’s 

concurrence is conclusively presumed if 

it does not act within six months after 

receiving the applicant’s certification. 

See 16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(A). At this 

time, no state has included FCC 

licensing in its coastal management 

plan. If the state does not include FCC 

licensing in its coastal management 

plan, such licensing is an ‘‘unlisted 

activity.’’ For unlisted activities, NOAA 

rules require that the state notify the 

relevant federal agencies, applicants, 

and the Director of the Office of Ocean 

and Coastal Resource Management 

(OCRM) (within NOAA) of the state’s 

request to review the activity within 

thirty days of notice of the license or 

permit application, or otherwise be 

deemed to have waived the right to 

review the unlisted activity. See 15 CFR 

930.54. 

4. Certification Requirement: The 

Order on Reconsideration amends the 

certification requirement of § 1.767 to 

clarify that the applicant need only 

certify that the proposed submarine 

cable will not be located in or impact 

any state that requires review of FCC 

cable landing applications as a listed 

activity in its coastal management plan. 

5. Constructive Notice to States: The 

Order on Reconsideration clarifies that 

the thirty-day time period for a state to 

request NOAA approval for consistency 

review of the application as an unlisted 

activity will commence with the 

issuance of the Public Notice that the 

submarine cable landing license 

application has been accepted for filing. 

NOAA rules allow for constructive 

notice to a state of submission of an 

application for licenses for unlisted 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81489 

activities. ‘‘Notice to the State agency 

may be constructive if notice is 

published in an official federal public 

notification document or through an 

official State clearinghouse. * * *’’ 15 

CFR 930.54(a)(2). Issuance of the 

accepted-for-filing Public Notice 

provides constructive notice to a state of 

the submission of submarine cable 

landing license application and 

commences the thirty-day period 

specified in § 930.54(a)(1). This 

publication of the Order on 

Reconsideration in the Federal Register 

provides constructive notice to the 

states of this finding and of the utility 

of monitoring Public Notices for federal 

license activities that may be subject to 

consistency review. See 15 CFR 

930.54(a)(1), providing that ‘‘[w]ith the 

assistance of Federal agencies, State 

agencies should monitor unlisted 

federal license or permit activities.’’ 

6. The accepted-for-filing Public 

Notice provides a description of the 

proposed submarine cable, including 

the location of the landing points. The 

Public Notice also provides the file 

number for the application so that 

interested parties can access the 

application itself through the FCC Web 

site. A cable landing license application 

is publicly available before an acceptedfor-filing Public Notice is released. The 

application must be filed electronically 

via the International Bureau Filing 

System (IBFS), 1 CFR 1.767(n); see also 

1 CFR 1.10000 et seq., and is available 

for viewing though IBFS once it is filed. 

IBFS includes a Submarine Cable 

Landing Pending Application List as a 

pre-defined report, and also allows for 

searches for pending applications, as 

well as current cable landing licenses. 

The Public Notice thus contains 

sufficient information about the 

proposed activity requiring a cable 

landing license to permit potentially 

affected states to evaluate whether there 

will be an impact that, subject to 

NOAA’s agreement, warrants 

consistency review. 

7. The accepted-for-filing Public 

Notices are available on the FCC Web 

site and are included in the FCC’s Daily 

Digest. The Daily Digest provides a brief 

synopsis of Commission documents, 

including Public Notices, released each 

business day. The Daily Digest is 

available on the FCC Web site http:// 

www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/ 

Daily_Digest, and one can also subscribe 

to the Daily Digest and have a copy sent 

via e-mail http://www.fcc.gov/ 

Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/ 

subscribe.html. 

8. Streamlining Process: Streamlined 

processing will be available for all 

applications where the states have 

waived, or are deemed to have waived, 

any section 1456(c)(3)(A) right to review 

the application as an unlisted activity. 

Also, all applications for transfer of 

control or assignment of a cable landing 

station license or modification that do 

not affect the construction of a 

submarine cable system or cable landing 

station are not subject to a consistency 

review and are eligible for the 

streamlined grant procedures. 

9. With the above-discussed 

clarification of the rules, the 

Commission anticipates that the CZMA 

requirements will rarely if ever disrupt 

the streamlined processing of cable 

landing license applications. Unless a 

state were to change its coastal 

management program to include FCC 

cable landing licenses as a listed 

activity, or were to timely request 

NOAA approval for consistency review 

of a particular cable landing application 

as an unlisted federal license activity, 

there would be no change to the 

Commission’s streamlined process. The 

Commission has minimized licensee 

burdens associated with compliance 

with the CZMA by removing any 

ambiguity about the consistency 

certification that section 1456(c)(3)(A) 

requires to be included in the 

application (with a copy to the state) if 

this is a listed activity, and clarifying 

the requirements with respect to states 

that do not list this type of application 

in their federally approved state 

programs. As long as no state amends its 

coastal management program to 

designate this type of application as a 

listed activity, the Commission must 

remove from streamlined processing 

only those applications that a state, 

within thirty days of constructive notice 

of the application, has identified as 

involving an unlisted activity that it 

believes requires consistency review. 

The applicant would be required to 

amend its application to submit a 

consistency certification (with a copy to 

the state) only if OCRM ultimately 

approved state consistency review of the 

unlisted activity. In that event, a delay 

of up to six months from the original 

Federal agency notice to the state 

agency or three months after the state 

receives the applicant’s required 

consistency certification, whichever 

period terminates last, is unavoidable 

under applicable statutory and 

regulatory provisions. 

10. Workability of Rules: The 

Commission disagrees with NASCA that 

the CZMA rules present applicants with 

a ‘‘Catch-22’’ in Florida. NASCA argues 

that applicants face a ‘‘Catch 22’’ in 

Florida because Florida requires 

applicants to first obtain and submit a 

copy of their cable landing license, and 

thus, according to NASCA, under the 

CZMA rules, there is no way to obtain 

the federal and state approvals needed 

to land an undersea cable in Florida. 

The Order on Reconsideration notes that 

there is no current requirement that a 

cable landing license application must 

include a certification regarding the 

consistency of proposed activities with 

Florida’s coastal management program, 

because Florida has not included FCC 

cable landing licenses as a listed activity 

in its coastal management plan. 

Consequently, with the clarification to 

our rules discussed above, there is no 

‘‘Catch-22’’ situation in Florida, because 

the certification requirement only 

applies to listed activities and 

Applicants only need to comply with 

the procedures for unlisted activities 

discussed above. The Order on 

Reconsideration further notes that any 

problem with Florida’s specific 

situation that may arise in the future 

could be addressed in consultation 

among the affected parties, including 

the state licensing agency, the FCC, and 

the Director of OCRM, as would be 

required if Florida were to amend its 

coastal management program to 

designate this type of application as a 

listed activity or to receive approval to 

review a particular application as an 

unlisted activity. Thus, if Florida 

amends its coastal management program 

to designate a cable landing license 

application as a listed activity, the FCC 

will take appropriate steps to address 

NASCA’s concerns. 

11. The new rules do not change what 

applicants for a cable landing license 

are required to provide the FCC other 

than the certification requirements 

necessary to alert the Commission of 

any outstanding state consistency 

review and to ensure Commission 

compliance with the CZMA. The new 

requirements relate to assuring 

compliance with the CZMA, and, as 

discussed above, the Commission defers 

to NOAA’s expertise in the applicability 

of the consistency review procedures 

specified in the CZMA. 

12. WTO: The Order on 

Reconsideration finds that the CZMA 

procedures, as clarified, interject no 

ambiguity concerning the time normally 

required to reach a decision on a license 

application. Rather, as required by WTO 

commitments, all license processing 

requirements, including any delays 

attributable to CZMA, are transparent 

and spelled out in the applicable 

statutes and rules. 

13. Request to Defer Effective Date: 

NASCA’s request to defer the effective 

date of the rules is moot since the 

Commission did not put the new rules 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81490 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

into effect while NASCA’s Petition for 

Reconsideration was pending. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Analysis 

14. The Report and Order contains 

rules with new information collections 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). Implementation of 

these rules will be subject to approval 

by OMB as prescribed by the PRA. The 

Commission has published a separate 

notice in the Federal Register inviting 

OMB, the general public, and other 

Federal agencies to comment on the 

information collection requirements 

contained in this document. In addition, 

the Commission notes pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–298, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), that the Commission 

previously sought specific comment on 

how the Commission may ‘‘further 

reduce the information collection 

burden for small business concerns with 

fewer than 25 employees.’’ 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

15. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, as amended (RFA) requires that a 

Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis be 

prepared for notice-and-comment rule 

making proceedings, unless the agency 

certifies that ‘‘the rule will not, if 

promulgated, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities.’’ The RFA 

generally defines the term ‘‘small entity’’ 

as having the same meaning as the terms 

‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ 

and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 

In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ 

has the same meaning as the term ‘‘small 

business concern’’ under the Small 

Business Act. 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). 

16. This proceeding was initiated as 

part of the Commission’s 2002 biennial 

regulatory review process. Through this 

review, the Commission has sought to: 

Improve the processing of authorization 

applications and regulation of 

international services; and lessen the 

regulatory burdens placed on carriers. 

17. In the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, 69 FR 13276, the 

Commission certified that the rules 

proposed in this proceeding would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This Order on Reconsideration will 

amend the submarine cable landing 

rules to require applicants to include 

information regarding an applicant’s 

compliance with the Coastal Zone 

Management Act of l972. Although the 

majority of submarine cable landing 

license applicants are not considered 

small entities, the rule changes affecting 

these applicants are nominal and will 

ensure that our rules are consistent with 

the Coastal Zone Management Act of 

1972. Therefore, we find that the rules 

adopted in this Order on 

Reconsideration will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Ordering Clauses 

18. For the reasons discussed above, 

it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 

4(j), and 5, of the Communications Act 

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 

154(i), 154(j), 155, sections 34–39 of the 

Cable Landing License Act, 47 U.S.C. 

34–39, and Sections 1.3 and 1.115 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.3, 1.115, 

that the Petition for Reconsideration of 

the Commission’s Report and Order 

filed by NASCA is granted to the extent 

described in this Order and is otherwise 

denied. 

19. It is further ordered that, pursuant 

to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 5 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 

155, and sections 34–39 of the Cable 

Landing License Act, 47 U.S.C. 34–39, 

Part 1 of the Commission’s rules is 

amended as set forth in the Appendix. 

20. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this report and order, including the 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification, to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration in accordance with 

section 603(a) of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

21. It is further ordered that the 

Regulatory Flexibility Certification, as 

required by section 604 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and as set 

forth above is adopted. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 1 and 

63 

Cable, Telecommunications. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

Final Rules 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission amends 47 CFR part 1 as 

follows: 

PART 1—PRACTICE AND 

PROCEDURE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 79 et seq.; 47 U.S.C. 

151, 154(j), 160, 201, 225, and 303(r). 

■ 2. Section 1.767 is amended by 

revising the note to paragraph (a)(10) 

and paragraph (k)(4) to read as follows. 

§ 1.767 Cable landing licenses. 

* * * * * 

Note to paragraph (a)(10) —Applicants for 

cable landing licenses may be subject to the 

consistency certification requirements of the 

Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 

U.S.C. 1456, if they propose to conduct 

activities, in or outside of a coastal zone of 

a state with a federally-approved 

management plan, affecting any land or water 

use or natural resource of that state’s coastal 

zone. Before filing their applications for a 

license to construct and operate a submarine 

cable system or to modify the construction of 

a previously approved submarine cable 

system, applicants must determine whether 

they are required to certify that their 

proposed activities will comply with the 

enforceable policies of a coastal state’s 

approved management program. In order to 

make this determination, applicants should 

consult National Oceanic Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) regulations, 15 CFR 

part 930, Subpart D, and review the approved 

management programs of coastal states in the 

vicinity of the proposed landing station to 

verify that this type of application is not a 

listed federal license activity requiring 

review. After the application is filed, 

applicants should follow the procedures 

specified in 15 CFR 930.54 to determine 

whether any potentially affected state has 

sought or received NOAA approval to review 

the application as an unlisted activity. If it 

is determined that any certification is 

required, applicants shall consult the affected 

coastal state(s) (or designated state 

agency(ies)) in determining the contents of 

any required consistency certification(s). 

Applicants may also consult the Office of 

Ocean and Coastal Management (OCRM) 

within NOAA for guidance. The cable 

landing license application filed with the 

Commission shall include any consistency 

certification required by section 1456(c)(3)(A) 

for any affected coastal state(s) that lists this 

type of application in its NOAA-approved 

coastal management program and shall be 

updated pursuant to § 1.65 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.65, to include 

any subsequently required consistency 

certification with respect to any state that has 

received NOAA approval to review the 

application as an unlisted federal license 

activity. Upon documentation from the 

applicant—or notification from each coastal 

state entitled to review the license 

application for consistency with a federally 

approved coastal management program—that 

the state has either concurred, or by its 

inaction, is conclusively presumed to have 

concurred with the applicant’s consistency 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81491 

certification, the Commission may take 

action on the application. 

* * * * * 

(k) * * * 

(4) Certifying that for applications for 

a license to construct and operate a 

submarine cable system or to modify the 

construction of a previously approved 

submarine cable system the applicant is 

not required to submit a consistency 

certification to any state pursuant to 

section 1456(c)(3)(A) of the Coastal 

Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 

U.S.C. 1456. 

Note to paragraph (k)(4) —Streamlining of 

cable landing license applications will be 

limited to those applications where all 

potentially affected states, having 

constructive notice that the application was 

filed with the Commission, have waived, or 

are deemed to have waived, any section 

1456(c)(3)(A) right to review the application 

within the thirty-day period prescribed by 15 

CFR 930.54. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32490 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[ET Docket No. 06–94; FCC 10–195] 

Digital Television Signals Pursuant to 

the Satellite Home Viewer Extension 

and Reauthorization Act of 2004 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document the 

Commission amends its rules to include 

measurement procedures for 

determining the strength of a digital 

broadcast television (DTV) signal at any 

specific location. These procedures will 

be used for determining whether 

households are eligible to receive 

distant DTV network signals 

retransmitted by satellite carriers, 

pursuant to the provisions of the 

Satellite Television Extension and 

Localism Act of 2010 (STELA). 

DATES: Effective January 27, 2011, 

except for amendment to § 73.686(e), 

which contains information collection 

requirements that are not effective until 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget. The Commission will 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register announcing the effective date 

for that amendment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ira 

Keltz, Office of Engineering and 

Technology, (202) 418–0616, e-mail: 

Ira.Keltz@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418–2989. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, ET Docket No. 06–94, FCC 

10–195, adopted November 22, 2010 

and released November 23, 2010. The 

full text of this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 

complete text of this document also may 

be purchased from the Commission’s 

copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room, CY– 

B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full 

text may also be downloaded at: 

www.fcc.gov. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (tty). 

Summary of Report and Order 

1. In accordance with the provisions 

of the STELA, the Commission amends 

its rules to include measurement 

procedures for determining the strength 

of a digital broadcast television (DTV) 

signal at any specific location. These 

procedures will be used for determining 

whether households are eligible to 

receive distant DTV network signals 

retransmitted by satellite carriers, 

pursuant to the provisions of the 

Satellite Television Extension and 

Localism Act of 2010 (STELA). The 

Report and Order implements DTV 

signal measurement procedures 

proposed in the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (SHVERA NPRM), 

75 FR 46885, August 4, 2010, and 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(STELA FNRPM) in this proceeding with 

minor modifications. The rules adopted 

herein were developed based on our 

recommendations in the SHVERA 

Report and comments received in 

response to the SHVERA NPRM and the 

STELA FNPRM. They largely rely on 

existing proven methods the 

Commission has already established for 

measuring analog television signal 

strength at any individual location, as 

set forth in § 73.686(d) of the existing 

rules, but include modifications as 

necessary to accommodate the inherent 

differences between analog and digital 

TV signals. The new digital signal 

measurement procedures include 

provisions for the location of the 

measurement antenna, antenna height, 

signal measurement method, antenna 

orientation and polarization, and data 

recording. 

2. On December 2004, Congress 

enacted the Satellite Home Viewer 

Extension and Reauthorization Act of 

2004 (SHVERA), which amended the 

Copyright Act and the Communications 

Act to further aid the competitiveness of 

satellite carriers and expand program 

offerings for satellite TV subscribers 

while protecting localism. The SHVERA 

included new provisions for distant 

digital signal reception and amended 

section 339 of the Communications Act 

and section 119 of the Copyright Act to 

provide three methods by which a 

subscriber can establish eligibility to 

receive such signals. First, a subscriber 

would be eligible to receive the distant 

digital signal of a particular network if 

his or her household was predicted by 

the Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA) 

ILLR model to be unserved by the overthe-air analog signal of any affiliate of 

that network (not necessarily the local 

affiliate). Second, a subscriber whose 

household was predicted to be served 

by a local station’s analog signal could 

request an on-site signal strength test to 

determine if his or her household is 

unable to receive that station’s digital 

signal. Third, a satellite subscriber 

could receive distant digital signals if 

the television network station granted a 

waiver to allow satellite retransmission 

of the relevant network from a distant 

station. 

3. Section 204 of the SHVERA also 

directed the Commission to conduct an 

inquiry regarding whether the 

Commission’s digital TV signal strength 

standards and signal measurement 

procedures for determining if a 

household is ‘‘unserved’’ by local signals 

should be revised. Section 204 of 

SHVERA further directed the 

Commission to provide Congress with a 

Report on its findings and 

recommendations for any revisions that 

might be necessary for implementing 

DTV measurement standards and 

procedures. Pursuant to this 

requirement, the Commission issued a 

Notice of Inquiry and, on December 8, 

2005, issued the SHVERA Report to 

Congress that, in relevant part, stated 

that the Commission generally believes 

that the digital television measurement 

procedures should be similar to the 

Commission’s current procedures for 

measuring the field strength of analog 

television stations in § 73.686(d) of the 

rules, but with certain modifications to 

address the differences between analog 

and digital TV signals. The Commission 

also stated that no changes are needed 

to the digital television field strength 

standards and/or planning factors for 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES