[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 14, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1871-1872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-832]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 87-268; DA 97-23]


Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on the Existing 
Television Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of time.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission is extending the time for filing reply comments 
relating to the Sixth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in this 
proceeding until January 24, 1997. This action will allow the 
development of a complete record on the matter of channel allotments 
for operation of digital TV service.

DATES: Reply comments are due on or before January 24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Franca (202-418-2470), Alan 
Stillwell (202-418-2470) or Robert Eckert (202-428-2470), Office of 
Engineering and Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. On July 25, 1996, the Commission adopted 
a Sixth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Sixth FNPRM) in MM 
Docket No. 87-268, 61 FR 43209, August 21, 1996, that proposed policies 
for developing the initial channel allotments for digital TV (DTV) 
service, proposed procedures for assigning DTV allotments, and plans 
for spectrum recovery. The Sixth FNPRM also contains a draft DTV Table 
of Allotments. Comments responding to the Sixth FNPRM initially were 
due November 22, 1996. On November 20, 1996, we issued an Order, 61 FR 
63811, December 2, 1996, extending the date for filing reply comments 
in response to the Sixth FNPRM to January 10, 1997.
    2. On January 2, 1997, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Sullivan 
Broadcasting Company, Inc. (Group Owners) requested that we extend the 
date for filing reply comments in response to the Sixth FNPRM an 
additional 60 days. The Group Owners submit that this additional time 
is needed for themselves and other UHF station licensees to finalize 
and present to the Commission a technically and commercially reasonable 
solution that creates better coverage parity between UHF and VHF 
stations and also ameliorates certain seriously adverse effects on UHF 
television stations inherent in the primary allotment plans now under 
consideration by the Commission. They argue that any delay in adopting 
the DTV Table of Allotments that is occasioned by the requested 
extension would be outweighed by the need for the Commission to have a 
full record on the effects that its actions in this proceeding have on 
UHF broadcasters.
    3. The Association for Maximum Service Television (MSTV) opposes 
the Group Owners' request for an extension of the time for filing reply 
comments. MSTV states that while it is sympathetic with the concerns 
expressed in the Group Owners request, it believes that those concerns 
may be addressed without further delaying the DTV allotment proceeding. 
It argues that it is critical that the Commission conclude this 
proceeding as promptly as possible so that the transition to DTV may 
begin. MSTV argues that an across-the-board 60-day extension would 
delay our rule making action, and that the submission of any proposal 
could require still another round of comments that would cause further 
delay. MSTV therefore urges that we deny the Group Owners extension 
request. As an alternative, it suggests that we state that we will 
accept late-filed reply comments for four weeks after the current 
January 10, 1997, due date for reply comments to afford broadcasters 
the opportunity to evaluate and respond to questions concerning this 
issue.
    4. In comments responding to the Group Owners' request, Motorola

[[Page 1872]]

submits that we have already provided interested parties sufficient 
time to prepare responses to the comments on the Sixth FNPRM and that 
an additional 60 days would constitute an unwarranted delay. It states 
that expedited decision making on the initial DTV Table of Allotments 
will facilitate the introduction of DTV services to the public and 
clarify the status of the broadcast television spectrum and its 
availability for reallocation. Motorola also submits that while it can 
appreciate the Group Owners' concerns regarding the permissible 
transmitting powers provided for their DTV stations, the ramifications 
of ``service replication'' have been apparent since the release of the 
Sixth FNPRM in mid-August. It therefore argues that a further delay of 
two months to address DTV planning factors is unnecessary. Motorola 
further states that it would not, however, be adverse to a more modest 
extension of perhaps 15 days, given the intervening holiday season and 
the large number of comments received in this proceeding.
    5. On January 7, 1997, the Association of Federal Communications 
Consulting Engineers (AFCCE) requested that we extend the date for 
filing reply comments for at least six weeks. The AFCCE expressed a 
similar request for extension of time in its comments responding to the 
Sixth FNPRM. The AFCCE states that its objective is not to unduly delay 
this proceeding, but to request that sufficient time be allotted to the 
study of major technical issues prior to the adoption of technical 
standards for the allotment of DTV channels by the Commission. It also 
submits that it is reviewing the filings of other entities and plans to 
respond to technical comments where it deems appropriate.
    6. In its comments responding to the Sixth FNPRM, the engineering 
consulting firm of du Treil, Lundin and Rackley (DLR) also expresses 
concerns regarding the significantly higher power that would be 
authorized for the DTV operations of existing VHF stations that would 
operate in the UHF band. DLR submits that it is not practical to try to 
replicate superior VHF propagation characteristics with brute force UHF 
power. To address this concern, it submits an alternative transition 
plan that would provide existing stations with DTV facilities that 
would replicate their existing Grade A contours and would return 
stations to their existing channels for permanent DTV operation after 
the transition. DLR requests that we consider a further extension of 
the date for filing reply comments of not less than 45 days in view of 
the complexity of these issues and the intervening holiday season. It 
further states that, due to the extraordinary nature of this 
proceeding, we should designate a formal period in which to file 
comments responding to reply comments.
    7. We agree with MSTV and Motorola that it is in the public 
interest to complete this proceeding and license DTV stations without 
unnecessary delay. At the same time, we believe that it is desirable to 
provide some additional time for the Group Owners, the AFCCE, DLR, and 
other interested parties to address in more detail the issues they have 
raised. We do not believe the approach suggested by MSTV that we accept 
late-filed comments for up to four weeks beyond the current date for 
filing reply comments is advisable. Rather, we believe that a two-week 
additional extension of the date for filing reply comments would 
provide an adequate period of time for broadcasters to submit 
additional information addressing the issues discussed in the Group 
Owners' and AFCCE's extension requests and DLR's comments without 
delaying our decision in this matter. This two week period will allow 
the development of a complete record on the matter of channel 
allotments for operation of digital TV service. We therefore are 
extending the date for filing reply comments to January 24, 1997. We 
also agree with MSTV that providing an additional period for parties to 
respond to reply comments would create unnecessary delay and therefore 
will not provide for acceptance of replies to reply comments, as 
requested by DLR.
    8. Accordingly, it is ordered that the requests for extension of 
the time for filing reply comments submitted by the Group Owners, the 
AFCCE, and DLR ARE GRANTED to the extent indicated herein and that the 
date for filing reply comments relating to the Sixth FNPRM IS EXTENDED 
to January 24, 1997. This action is taken pursuant to authority 
provided in Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154(i) and 303(r), and Sections 0.31, 0.241 
and 1.46 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR Secs. 0.31, 0.241 and 1.46.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-832 Filed 1-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P