Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Proposed Rules 76203

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of § 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not

apply. As required by § 3 of Executive

Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7,

1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has

taken the necessary steps to eliminate

drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’’ issued under the executive

order. This rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: November 27, 2000.

William J. Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.

[FR Doc. 00–30912 Filed 12–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[Docket Id–00–01; FRL–6912–4]

Finding of Attainment for PM–10;

Portneuf Valley PM–10 Nonattainment

Area, Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to find that

the Portneuf Valley nonattainment area

in Idaho has attained the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

for particulate matter with an

aerodynamic diameter of less than, or

equal to a nominal ten micrometers

(PM–10) as of December 31, 1996.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before December 26,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed to Debra Suzuki, SIP

Manager, Office of Air Quality,

Mailcode OAQ–107, EPA Region 10,

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington, 98101. Copies of

documents relevant to this action are

available for public review during

normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30

p.m.) at this same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven K. Body, Office of Air Quality,

EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle Washington, 98101, (206) 553–

0782.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this notice, the words ‘‘we’’,

‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ means the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA).

Table of Comments

I. Background

A. Designation and Classification of PM–10

Nonattainment Areas.

B. How Does EPA Make Attainment

Determinations?

C. What is the Attainment Date for the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 Nonattainment

Area?

D. What PM–10 Planning has Occurred for

the Portneuf Valley PM–10

Nonattainment Area?

II. EPA’s Proposed Action

A. What Does the Air Quality Data Show

As of the December 31, 1996 Attainment

Date?

B. Does the More Recent Air Quality Data

Also Show Attainment?

C. Request for Public Comment.

III. Administrative Requirements

I. Background

A. Designation and Classification of

PM–10 Nonattainment Areas

Areas meeting the requirements of

section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) were designated nonattainment

for PM–10 by operation of law and

classified ‘‘moderate’’ upon enactment

of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.

See generally 42 U.S.C. 7407(d)(4)(B).

These areas included all former Group

I PM–10 planning areas identified in 52

FR 29383 (August 7, 1987), as further

clarified in 55 FR 45799 (October 31,

1990), and any other areas violating the

NAAQS for PM–10 prior to January 1,

1989. A Federal Register notice

announcing the areas designated

nonattainment for PM–10 upon

enactment of the 1990 Amendments,

known as ‘‘initial’’ PM–10

nonattainment areas, was published on

March 15, 1991 (56 FR 11101) and a

subsequent Federal Register document

correcting the description of some of

these areas was published on August 8,

1991 (56 FR 37654). The PowerBannock Counties PM–10

nonattainment area was one of these

initial moderate PM–10 nonattainment

areas. As discussed below, the Portneuf

Valley PM–10 nonattainment area was

originally part of the Power-Bannock

Counties PM–10 nonattainment area.

All initial moderate PM–10

nonattainment areas had the same

applicable attainment date of December

31, 1994. Section 188(d) provides the

Administrator the authority to grant up

to two one-year extensions to the

attainment date provided certain

requirements are met. States containing

initial moderate PM–10 nonattainment

areas were required to develop and

submit to EPA by November 15, 1991,

a SIP revision providing

implementation of reasonably available

control measures (RACM), including

reasonably available control technology

(RACT), and a demonstration of whether

attainment of the PM–10 NAAQS by the

December 31, 1994 attainment date was

practicable. See section 189(a).

B. How Does EPA Make Attainment

Determinations

All PM–10 nonattainment areas are

initially classified ‘‘moderate’’ by

operation of law when they are

designated nonattainment. See section

188(a). Pursuant to sections 179(c) and

188(b)(2) of the Act, we have the

responsibility of determining within six

months of the applicable attainment

date whether, based on air quality data,

PM–10 nonattainment areas attained the

PM–10 NAAQS by that date.

Determinations under section 179(c)(1)

of the Act are to be based upon the

area’s ‘‘air quality as of the attainment

date.’’ Section 188(b)(2) is consistent

with this requirement.

Generally, we determine whether an

area’s air quality is meeting the PM–10

NAAQS for purposes of section

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) based upon data

gathered at established state and local

air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and

national air monitoring stations (NAMS)

in the nonattainment areas and entered

into the EPA Aerometric Information

Retrieval System (AIRS). Data entered

into the AIRS has been determined to

meet federal monitoring requirements

(see 40 CFR 50.6, 40 CFR part 50,

appendix J, 40 CFR part 53, 40 CFR part

58, appendix A &B) and may be used to

determine the attainment status of areas.

We will also consider air quality data

from other air monitoring stations in the

nonattainment area provided that the

stations meet the federal monitoring

requirements for SLAMS. All data are

reviewed to determine the area’s air

quality status in accordance with our

guidance at 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.

Attainment of the annual PM–10

standard is achieved when the annual

76204 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Proposed Rules

arithmetic mean PM–10 concentration

over a three year period (for example

1994, 1995, and 1996 for areas with a

December 31, 1996 attainment date) is

equal to or less than 50 micrograms per

cubic meter (ug/m3). Attainment of the

24-hour standard is determined by

calculating the expected number of days

in a year with PM–10 concentrations

greater than 150 ug/m3. The 24-hour

standard is attained when the expected

number of days with levels above 150

ug/m3 (averaged over a three year

period) is less than or equal to one.

Three consecutive years of air quality

data are generally required to show

attainment of the annual and 24-hour

standards for PM–10. See 40 CFR part

50 and appendix K.

C. What is the Attainment Date for the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 Nonattainment

Area

As stated above, the Power-Bannock

Counties PM–10 nonattainment area

was designated nonattainment for PM–

10 and classified as moderate under

sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the

Clean Air Act upon enactment of the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.

The area covered approximately 266

square miles in south central Idaho and

included State lands in portions of

Power and Bannock Counties, as well as

both trust and fee lands within the Fort

Hall Indian Reservation. The cities of

Pocatello and Chubbuck were located

near the center of this nonattainment

area on State lands. Approximately 15

miles northwest of downtown Pocatello

is an area known as the ‘‘industrial

complex,’’ where two major stationary

sources of PM–10 are located, which

was also in the Power-Bannock Counties

PM–10 nonattainment area. The

boundary between the Fort Hall Indian

Reservation and State lands runs

through the industrial complex, with

the Astaris-Idaho, LLC facility (formerly

owned and operated by FMC

Corporation) located on the Fort Hall

Indian Reservation and the J.R. Simplot

Corporation facility located on State

lands immediately adjacent to the

Reservation. For an extensive discussion

of the history of the designation of the

Power-Bannock Counties PM–10

nonattainment area, please refer to the

discussion at 61 FR 29667, 29668–29670

(June 12, 1996).

The original attainment date for the

Power-Bannock Counties PM–10

nonattainment area was December 31,

1994. The attainment date was later

extended to December 31, 1995, and

then to December 31, 1996, under the

authority of section 188(d) of the Act.

See 61 FR 20730 (May 8, 1996) (first

one-year extension); 61 FR 66602

(December 18, 1996) (second one-year

extension). Effective December 7, 1998,

the Power-Bannock Counties PM–10

nonattainment area was split into two

nonattainment areas at the boundary

between the Fort Hall Indian

Reservation and State lands: the Fort

Hall PM–10 nonattainment area and the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment

area. For a more detailed discussion of

the rationale behind EPA’s decision to

split the Power-Bannock County PM–10

nonattainment area into two separate

PM–10 nonattainment areas, please refer

to the discussion at 63 FR 33597 (June

19, 1998)(proposed action) and 63 FR

59722 (November 5, 1998)(final action).

The attainment date for both

nonattainment areas continues to be

December 31, 1996.

D. What PM–10 Planning has Occurred

for the Portneuf Valley PM–10

Nonattainment Area

After the Power-Bannock Counties

PM–10 nonattainment area was

designated nonattainment for PM–10,

the Idaho Division of Environmental

Quality (IDEQ), the Shoshone-Bannock

Tribes, and EPA began to work together

in the early 1990s to prepare the

technical elements needed to bring the

area into attainment and meet the

planning requirements of title I of the

CAA. Based on these technical

products, IDEQ, along with several local

agencies, developed and implemented

control measures on PM–10 sources in

what is now known as the Portneuf

Valley PM–10 nonattainment area. The

State submitted these control measures

to EPA in 1993 as a moderate PM–10

nonattainment state implementation

plan (SIP) revision under section 189(a)

of the Act. The control measures

submitted by the State include a

comprehensive residential wood

combustion program, controls on

fugitive road dust, and a revised

operating permit for the J.R. Simplot

facility, the only major stationary source

of PM–10 in the Portneuf Valley PM–10

nonattainment area. EPA has not yet

taken final action to approve the State’s

moderate PM–10 SIP for the area and

additional air quality planning efforts

may be needed because of recent air

quality data. EPA will take action on

IDEQ’s SIP revision for the Portneuf

Valley PM–10 nonattainment area in a

separate rulemaking. For a discussion of

the PM–10 planning for the Fort Hall

PM–10 Nonattainment Area, please refer

to 64 FR 7308 (February 12, 1999); 65

FR 51412 (August 23, 2000).

II. EPA’s Proposed Action

A. What Does the Air Quality Data Show

As of the December 31, 1996 Attainment

Date?

Whether an area has attained the PM–

10 NAAQS is based exclusively upon

measured air quality levels over the

most recent and complete three calendar

year period. See 40 CFR part 50 and 40

CFR 50, appendix K. For an area with

a December 31, 1996, attainment date,

data reported for calendar years 1994,

1995 and 1996 is considered.

The State of Idaho has established and

operated four PM–10 SLAMS

monitoring sites in the Portneuf Valley

PM–10 nonattainment area during 1994

through 1996. The State began

monitoring for PM–10 in 1986 at the

Sewage Treatment Plant (STP)

monitoring site, located approximately

one mile to the northeast of the

industrial complex. A site at Idaho State

University (ISU), located near

downtown Pocatello, began operation in

1988 and continued operation until June

1999. The Chubbuck School monitoring

site (CS), located approximately four

miles northeast of the industrial

complex, began operation in 1989 and

continued operation until July 1999. In

1990, a fourth PM–10 monitoring site

was established at the intersection of

Garrett and Gould (G&G), located

approximately halfway between the

industrial complex and downtown

Pocatello. All four monitoring sites meet

EPA SLAMS network design and siting

requirements, set forth at 40 CFR part

58, appendices D and E, and continue

to monitor for PM–10.

There have been no violations of the

annual PM–10 standard at any of the

State monitors since 1990. A violation

of the 24-hour PM–10 NAAQS was

recorded at the ISU and G&G monitoring

sites on January 7, 1993. As a result of

the one-in-every six day sampling

frequency at each of these sites at that

time, the expected exceedance rate for

the 1993 calendar year at the SLAMS

sites was 6.0. No measured values above

the level of the 24-hour NAAQS were

recorded, however, in the remainder of

1993, 1994, 1995, or 1996. Therefore,

the three year average (1994, 1995,

1996) expected exceedance rate at the

SLAMS sites as of the attainment date

of December 31, 1996 is 0.0. This data

was discussed in detail in the June 19,

1998, Federal Register notice which

proposed to split the Power-Bannock

Counties PM–10 nonattainment area at

the State-Reservation boundary. See 63

FR 33597. In the public comments

received on that proposal, no one

disputed the validity of that data and

EPA has received no additional air

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Proposed Rules 76205

quality data since that time for the

period from 1994 to 1996 showing an

exceedence of PM–10 standards.

Therefore, EPA proposes to find that the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment

area attained the PM–10 standard by

extended attainment date of December

31, 1996.

B. Does the More Recent Air Quality

Data Also Show Attainment?

Although the attainment date for the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment

area is December 31, 1996, and the air

quality data used to judge attainment by

that date includes all data collected in

calendar years 1994, 1995, and 1996,

EPA has also reviewed the air quality

data collected at the State monitoring

sites from 1997 through the second

quarter of 2000. During 1997, the

highest measured PM–10 concentration

was recorded at the STP site at a level

of 149 ug/m3, just below the level of the

24-hour standard. All other

measurements in the Portneuf Valley

PM–10 nonattainment area during 1997

were less than 100 ug/m3. During 1998,

the highest measured PM–10

concentration recorded on any of the

State monitors was at the CS site, at a

level of 118 ug/m3. The second highest

measured PM–10 concentration was at

the ISU site, at a level of 108 ug/m3. All

other measurements in the area were

less than 100 ug/m3 during 1998.

During the end of December 1999 and

the beginning of January 2000, there was

a significant air pollution episode in the

Portneuf Valley and Fort Hall PM–10

nonattainment areas during which

elevated levels of PM–10 were recorded

on the State monitors as well as on the

Tribal monitors. In addition, both the

State of Idaho and the ShoshoneBannock Tribes received a significant

number of air quality complaints during

this time. During this several day

episode, three levels above the level of

the 24-hour PM–10 NAAQS were

reported on the State monitors, all of

which occurred at the G&G site: 183 ug/

m3 on December 27, 1999, 168 ug/m3

on December 29, 1999, and 159 ug/m3

on December 31, 1999. The next highest

concentration at the G&G site during

1999 was 146 ug/m3 on December 26,

1999, which is below the level of the 24-

hour PM–10 standard. The G&G site

samples every day between October 1st

and March 30th. The other three State

monitoring sites did not report levels

above 150 ug/m3, the level of the 24-

hour PM–10 standard. The next highest

level reported at any of the other of the

State monitoring sites during 1999 was

124 ug/m3 recorded at the STP site on

December 26, 1999. The highest

reported concentration during 1999 at

the ISU site was 74 ug/m3 on January

25, 1999, and at the CS site was 39 ug/

m3 on January 30, 1999. During the first

two quarters of 2000, the highest 24-

hour PM–10 concentration was recorded

at the G&G site, at 112 ug/m3 on

February 6, 2000.

Although the three days with

concentrations above the level of the 24-

hour PM–10 NAAQS reported at the

G&G site at the end of 1999 are of

concern to EPA, these data do not

represent a violation of the 24-hour PM–

10 standard because there were no days

with levels above the 24-hour PM–10

standard during 1997 and 1998. Three

exceedences in three years results in an

expected exceedance rate of 1.0 for the

three-year period from 1997 to 1999,

just below the rate that would represent

a violation of the 24-hour PM–10

standard. Should any measured level

above the 24-hour PM–10 standard be

recorded at G&G site during the years

2000 or 2001, however, then a violation

of the 24-hour PM–10 standard would

exist in the Portneuf Valley PM–10

nonattainment area. EPA is continuing

to closely follow the air quality data

reported by the State of Idaho for the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment

area.

In summary, there were no PM–10

concentrations above the level of the 24-

hour standard at any of the four

different SLAMS monitoring sites in the

Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment

area in 1994, 1995, and 1996, which

indicates that the Portneuf Valley area

attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS as of

December 31, 1996. Review of the

annual standard for calendar years 1994,

1995 and 1996 reveals that the Portneuf

Valley area also attained the annual

PM–10 NAAQS as of December 31,

1996. The area has continued to attain

the 24-hour and annual PM–10

standards since that time. Therefore,

EPA proposes to find that the Portneuf

Valley PM–10 nonattainment area

attained the PM–10 NAAQS as of

December 31, 1996. If we finalize this

proposal, consistent with CAA section

188, the area will remain a moderate

PM–10 nonattainment area and will

avoid the additional planning

requirements that apply to serious PM–

10 nonattainment areas.

This proposed finding of attainment

should not be confused, however, with

a redesignation to attainment under

CAA section 107(d) because Idaho has

not submitted a maintenance plan as

required under section 175(A) of the

CAA or met the other CAA requirements

for redesignations to attainment. The

designation status in 40 CFR part 81

will remain moderate nonattainment for

the Portneuf Valley PM–10

nonattainment area until such time as

Idaho meets the CAA requirements for

redesignations to attainment.

C. Request for Public Comment

We are soliciting public comments on

EPA’s proposal to find that the Portneuf

Valley PM–10 nonattainment area has

attained the PM–10 NAAQS as of the

December 31, 1996 attainment date.

These comments will be considered

before taking final action. Interested

parties may participate in the Federal

rulemaking process by submitting

written comments to the EPA Regional

office listed in the ADDRESSES section of

this document.

III. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory

action’’ and therefore is not subject to

review by the Office of Management and

Budget. This proposed action merely

makes a determination based on air

quality date and does not impose any

requirements. Accordingly, the

Administrator certifies that this

proposed rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.). Because this proposed rule does

not impose any enforceable duty, it does

not contain any unfunded mandate or

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, as described in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Public Law 104–4). For the same

reason, this proposed rule also does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This proposed

rule will not have substantial direct

effects on the states, on the relationship

between the national government and

the states, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government, as

specified in Executive Order 13132 (64

FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it

merely makes a determination based on

air quality date and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also

is not subject to Executive Order 13045

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because

it is not economically significant.

As required by section 3 of Executive

Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7,

1996), in issuing this proposed rule,

EPA has taken the necessary steps to

eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity,

minimize potential litigation, and

provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct. EPA has complied

76206 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Proposed Rules

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the

takings implications of the rule in

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under

the executive order. This rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 21, 2000.

Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

[FR Doc. 00–31053 Filed 12–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00–2676, MM Docket No. 00–241, RM–

9968]

Digital Television Broadcast Service;

Hastings, NE

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by the

Nebraska Educational

Telecommunications Commission,

licensee of noncommercial educational

Station KHNE(TV), NTSC Channel *29,

Hastings, Nebraska, requesting the

substitution of DTV Channel *28 for

station KHNE(TV)’s assigned DTV

Channel *14. DTV Channel *14 can be

allotted to Hastings, Nebraska, in

compliance with the principle

community coverage requirements of

Section 73.625(a) at reference

coordinates (40–46–20 N. and 98–05–21

W.). As requested, we propose to allot

DTV Channel *28 to Hastings with a

power of 200 and a height above average

terrain (HAAT) of 366 meters.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before January 22, 2001, and reply

comments on or before February 6,

2001.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room TW–A325, Washington, DC

20554. In addition to filing comments

with the FCC, interested parties should

serve the petitioner, or its counsel or

consultant, as follows: Todd D. Gray,

Margaret L. Miller, Christine J.

Newcomb, Dow, Lohnes & Albertson,

PLLC, 1200 New Hampshire Avenue,

NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036

(Counsel for Nebraska Educational

Telecommunications Commission).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

00–241, adopted November 30, 2000,

and released December 1, 2000. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center 445 12th Street,

SW., Washington, DC. The complete

text of this decision may also be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Services, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231

20th Street, NW., Washington, DC

20036.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television, Digital television

broadcasting.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Federal Communications

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR

part 73 as follows:

PART 73—TELEVISION BROADCAST

SERVICES

1. The authority citation for part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, and

336.

§ 73.622 [Amended]

2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of

Digital Television Allotments under

Nebraska is amended by removing DTV

Channel *14 and adding DTV Channel

*28 at Hastings.

Federal Communications Commission.

Barbara A. Kreisman,

Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media

Bureau.

[FR Doc. 00–30974 Filed 12–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00–2677, MM Docket No. 00–242, RM–

9998]

Digital Television Broadcast Service;

Weston, WV

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by Withers

Broadcasting Company of West Virginia,

licensee of station WDTV–TV, NTSC

channel 5, Weston, West Virginia,

requesting the substitution of DTV

channel 6 for station WDTV–TV’s

assigned DTV channel 58. DTV Channel

6 can be allotted to Weston, West

Virginia, in compliance with the

principal community coverage

requirements of Section 73.625(a) at

reference coordinates (39–04–29 N. and

80–25–28 W.). As requested, we propose

to allot DTV Channel 6 to Weston with

a power of 10 and a height above

average terrain (HAAT) of 253 meters.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before January 22, 2001, and reply

comments on or before February 6,

2001.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room TW–A325, Washington, DC

20554. In addition to filing comments

with the FCC, interested parties should

serve the petitioner, or its counsel or

consultant, as follows: M. Scott Johnson,

Lee G. Petro, Gardner, Carton & Douglas,

1301 K Street, NW., Suite 900, East

Tower, Washington, DC 20005 (Counsel

for Withers Broadcasting Company of

West Virginia).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

00–242, adopted November 30, 2000,

and released December 1, 2000. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center 445 12th Street,

SW., Washington, DC. The complete