Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2119 

1 47 CFR 76.1601 through 76.1630. 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 54 as follows: 

PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 54 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 

205, 214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 

unless otherwise noted. 

§ 54.201 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 54.201 by removing 

paragraph (j). 

§ 54.202 [Amended] 

■ 3. Amend § 54.202 by removing 

paragraphs (d) and (e). 

§ 54.205 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 54.205 by removing 

paragraph (c). 

■ 5. Amend § 54.404 by revising 

paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 54.404 The National Lifeline 

Accountability Database. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) If the Database indicates that 

another individual at the prospective 

subscriber’s residential address is 

currently receiving a Lifeline service, 

the eligible telecommunications carrier 

must not seek and will not receive 

Lifeline reimbursement for providing 

service to that prospective subscriber, 

unless the prospective subscriber has 

certified, pursuant to § 54.410(d) that to 

the best of his or her knowledge, no one 

in his or her household is already 

receiving a Lifeline service. This 

certification may only be obtained after 

the eligible telecommunications carrier 

receives a notification from the Database 

or state administrator that another 

Lifeline subscriber resides at the same 

address as the prospective subscriber. 

* * * * * 

§ 54.408 [Amended] 

■ 6. Amend § 54.408 by removing 

paragraph (f). 

■ 7. Amend § 54.410 by revising 

paragraphs (f)(2)(iii) and (f)(3)(iii) and 

removing and reserving paragraph (g) to 

read as follows: 

§ 54.410 Subscriber eligibility 

determination and certification. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) If the subscriber’s program-based 

or income-based eligibility for Lifeline 

cannot be determined by accessing one 

or more state databases containing 

information regarding enrollment in 

qualifying assistance programs, then the 

eligible telecommunications carrier may 

obtain a signed certification from the 

subscriber on a form that meets the 

certification requirements in paragraph 

(d) of this section. The subscriber must 

present documentation meeting the 

requirements in paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) or 

(c)(1)(i)(B) of this section to establish 

continued eligibility. If a Federal 

eligibility recertification form is 

available, entities enrolling subscribers 

must use such form to re-certify a 

qualifying low-income consumer. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iii) If the subscriber’s eligibility for 

Lifeline cannot be determined by 

accessing one or more databases 

containing information regarding 

enrollment in qualifying assistance 

programs, then the National Verifier, 

state Lifeline administrator, or state 

agency may obtain a signed certification 

from the subscriber on a form that meets 

the certification requirements in 

paragraph (d) of this section. The 

subscriber must present documentation 

meeting the requirements in paragraph 

(b)(1)(i)(B) or (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section 

to establish continued eligibility. If a 

Federal eligibility recertification form is 

available, entities enrolling subscribers 

must use such form to recertify a 

qualifying low-income consumer. 

* * * * * 

§ 54.418 [Removed and Reserved] 

■ 8. Remove and reserve § 54.418. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00153 Filed 1–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 76 

[MB Docket Nos. 17–317, 17–105; FCC 17– 

168] 

Electronic Delivery of MVPD 

Communications; Modernization of 

Media Regulation Initiative 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) addresses ways to 

modernize certain notice provisions in 

the Commission’s rules governing 

multichannel video and cable television 

service. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

February 15, 2018; reply comments are 

due on or before March 2, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by MB Docket Nos. 17–317, 

17–105, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s website: http://

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on this 

proceeding, contact Maria Mullarkey of 

the Policy Division, Media Bureau at 

Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, or (202) 418– 

2120. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 17–168, 

adopted and released on December 14, 

2017. The full text of this document is 

available electronically via the FCC’s 

Electronic Document Management 

System (EDOCS) website at https://

apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/ 

FCC-17-168A1.docx. Documents will be 

available electronically in ASCII, 

Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. 

This document is also available for 

public inspection and copying during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Information Center, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street SW, CY–A257, Washington, DC 

20554. Alternative formats are available 

for people with disabilities (Braille, 

large print, electronic files, audio 

format), by sending an email to fcc504@

fcc.gov or calling the Commission’s 

Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 

418–0432 (TTY). 

Synopsis 

1. In this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM), we address ways 

to modernize certain notice provisions 

in part 76 of the Federal 

Communications Commission’s rules 

governing multichannel video and cable 

television service. First, we seek 

comment on proposals to modernize the 

rules in subpart T of part 76 (subpart 

T),1 which sets forth notice 

requirements applicable to cable 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2120 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

2See Commission Launches Modernization of 

Media Regulation Initiative, Public Notice, 32 FCC 

Rcd 4406 (2017) (initiating a review of rules 

applicable to media entities to eliminate or modify 

regulations that are outdated, unnecessary, or 

unduly burdensome). 

3Subpart T refers to ‘‘subscribers,’’ ‘‘customers,’’ 

and ‘‘consumers’’ interchangeably. See, e.g., 47 CFR 

76.1602(b), 76.1603(b), 76.1622. In the NPRM, we 

use the term ‘‘subscribers’’ for consistency, but it 

includes both ‘‘customers’’ and ‘‘consumers’’ as 

used in subpart T. 

4See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review— 

Streamlining of Cable Television Services Part 76 

Public File and Notice Requirements, Report and 

Order, 14 FCC Rcd 4653 (1999); Second Report and 

Order, 16 FCC Rcd 19773 (2001). 

5To the extent the cable operator is required to 

provide notice of service and rate changes to 

subscribers, the operator may provide such notice 

using any reasonable written means at its sole 

discretion. 47 CFR 76.1603(e). 

6Such notification must be provided to each new 

subscriber upon initial installation and annually 

thereafter. Id. sec. 76.1620. The notice, which may 

be included in routine billing statements, must 

identify the signals that are unavailable without an 

additional connection, the manner for obtaining 

such additional connection, and instructions for 

installation. Id. 

7The offer of special equipment must be made to 

new subscribers at the time they subscribe and to 

all subscribers at least once each year. Id. sec. 

76.1621(a). 

operators. In particular, we propose to 

allow various types of written 

communications from cable operators to 

subscribers to be delivered 

electronically, if they are sent to a 

verified email address and the cable 

operator complies with other consumer 

safeguards. We also tentatively conclude 

that subscriber privacy notifications 

required pursuant to sections 631, 

338(i), and 653 of the Communications 

Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), may 

be delivered electronically to a verified 

email address, subject to consumer 

safeguards. In addition, we propose to 

permit cable operators to reply to 

consumer requests or complaints by 

email in certain circumstances. Second, 

we seek comment on how to update the 

requirement in §§ 76.64 and 76.66 of the 

Commission’s rules that requires 

broadcast television stations to send 

carriage election notices via certified 

mail. With this proceeding, we continue 

our efforts to modernize our regulations 

and reduce unnecessary requirements 

that can impede competition and 

innovation in the media marketplace.2

I. Background 

2. Subpart T Cable Notices. Subpart T 

regulates various aspects of cable 

operators’ communications with 

subscribers as well as with other parties, 

including television broadcast stations 

and the Commission.3 In 1999, the 

Commission revised and streamlined 

the cable television notice, public file, 

and recordkeeping requirements 

contained throughout part 76 of the 

Commission’s rules, and as part of this 

reorganization, it created a new subpart 

T for notice requirements.4 Among other 

requirements, subpart T requires cable 

operators to communicate specified 

information about various topics to their 

subscribers in writing, including the 

following: 

• Deletion or repositioning of 

broadcast signals (47 CFR 76.1601): 

Requires cable operators to provide 

written notice to subscribers if they are 

deleting a broadcast television station 

from carriage or repositioning that 

station. 

• Customer service—general 

information (47 CFR 76.1602): Requires 

cable operators to provide written 

information to subscribers at the time of 

installation, at least annually, and at any 

time upon request about: Products and 

services offered; prices and options for 

programming services and conditions of 

subscription to programming and other 

services; installation and service 

maintenance policies; instructions on 

how to use the cable service; channel 

positions of programming carried on the 

system; billing and complaint 

procedures; assessed fees for rental of 

navigation devices and single and 

additional CableCARDs; and the fees 

allocable to the rental of single and 

additional CableCARDs and the rental of 

operator-supplied navigation devices, if 

the provider includes equipment in the 

price of a bundled service offering. 

• Customer service—rate and service 

changes (47 CFR 76.1603): Requires 

cable operators to notify customers of 

any changes in rates, programming 

services, or channel positions as soon as 

possible in writing; to notify subscribers 

a minimum of 30 days in advance of 

such changes, if the change is within the 

control of the cable operator; to notify 

subscribers 30 days in advance of any 

significant changes in the other 

information required by § 76.1602; to 

give 30 days written notice to 

subscribers before implementing any 

rate or service change, stating the 

precise amount of any rate change and 

a brief explanation in readily 

understandable fashion of the cause of 

the rate change; to provide written 

notice to a subscriber of any increase in 

the price to be charged for the basic 

service tier or associated equipment at 

least 30 days before any proposed 

increase is effective (or 60 days if the 

equipment is provided to the consumer 

without charge pursuant to § 76.630), 

including the price to be charged, the 

date that the new charge will be 

effective, and the name and address of 

the local franchising authority.5

• Charges for customer service 

changes (47 CFR 76.1604): Requires 

cable systems to notify all subscribers in 

writing that they may be subject to a 

charge for changing service tiers more 

than the specified number of times in 

any 12-month period, if the cable 

operator establishes a higher charge for 

changes effected solely by coded entry 

on a computer terminal or by other 

similarly simple methods. 

• Basic tier availability (47 CFR 

76.1618): Requires a cable operator to 

provide written notification of the 

availability of basic tier service to new 

subscribers at the time of installation, 

which should include that the basic tier 

is available, the cost per month for basic 

tier service, and a list of all services 

included in the basic service tier. 

• Availability of signals (47 CFR 

76.1620): Requires a cable operator to 

notify subscribers of all broadcast 

stations carried on the cable system 

which cannot be viewed via cable 

without a converter box and to offer to 

sell or lease such a converter box to 

such subscribers, if a cable operator 

authorizes subscribers to install 

additional receiver connections, but 

does not provide the subscriber with 

such connections or with the equipment 

and materials for such connections.6

• Equipment compatibility offer (47 

CFR 76.1621): Requires cable system 

operators that use scrambling, 

encryption, or similar technologies in 

conjunction with cable system terminal 

devices that may affect subscribers’ 

reception of signals to offer to supply 

each subscriber with special equipment 

that will enable the simultaneous 

reception of multiple signals.7

• Consumer education program on 

compatibility (47 CFR 76.1622): 

Requires cable system operators to 

provide a consumer education program 

on compatibility matters to their 

subscribers in writing that includes 

certain information, such as notice that 

certain models of television receivers 

and videocassette recorders may not be 

able to receive all of the channels 

offered by the cable system when 

connected directly to the system, as well 

as an explanation of the types of 

channel compatibility problems that 

could occur if the device is connected 

directly to the system and suggestions to 

resolve such problems; notice that 

subscribers may not be able to use 

special features and functions of their 

television receivers and videocassette 

recorders where service is received 

through a cable system terminal device; 

and notice that remote control units 

compatible with cable system terminal 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2121 

8This information must be provided to 

subscribers at the time they first subscribe and at 

least once a year thereafter. Id. sec. 76.1622(a). The 

rule specifies that this notification requirement may 

also be satisfied by an annual mailing to all 

subscribers and may be included in one of the 

system’s regular subscriber billings. Id. 9See National Cable & Telecommunications 

Association and American Cable Association, 

Petition for Declaratory Ruling, Declaratory Ruling, 

32 FCC Rcd 5269 (2017) (2017 Declaratory Ruling). 

See 82 FR 35658. The Declaratory Ruling granted 

a petition for declaratory ruling filed by NCTA— 

The internet and Television Association (NCTA) 

and the American Cable Association (ACA). See 

Petition for Declaratory Ruling of National Cable & 

Telecommunications Association and American 

Cable Association, MB Docket No. 16–126 (filed 

Mar. 7, 2016) (requesting clarification that the 

written information that cable operators must 

provide to their subscribers pursuant to § 76.1602(b) 

of the Commission’s rules may be provided via 

electronic distribution). 

10 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5269, 

paragraph 1. 11 Id. at 5273, paragraph 7. 12 Id. In the Cable Television Consumer 

Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Congress, 

in order to ‘‘provide increased consumer 

protection,’’ amended section 632 of the Act to 

require the Commission to adopt customer service 

standards for cable operators. Public Law 102–385, 

106 Stat. 1460 (1992); 47 U.S.C. 552. In section 

632(b), Congress directs the Commission to 

‘‘establish standards by which cable operators may 

fulfill their customer service requirements’’ and 

specifies that ‘‘[s]uch standards shall include, at a 

minimum, requirements governing . . . 

communications between the cable operator and the 

subscriber (including standards governing bills and 

refunds).’’ 47 U.S.C. 552(b)(3). 

13 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, 

paragraph 9. 

14 Id. at 5272–73, paragraph 6. 

15 Id. at 5273, paragraph 8. 

16 ‘‘The Communications Act prohibits cable 

operators and other multichannel video 

programming distributors from retransmitting 

commercial television, low power television and 

radio broadcast signals without first obtaining the 

broadcaster’s consent. This permission is 

commonly referred to as ‘retransmission consent’ 

and may involve some compensation from the cable 

company to the broadcaster for the use of the signal. 

Alternately, local commercial and noncommercial 

television broadcast stations may require a cable 

operator that serves the same market as the 

broadcaster to carry its signal. A demand for 

carriage is commonly referred to as ‘must-carry.’ If 

the broadcast station asserts its must-carry rights, 

the broadcaster cannot demand compensation from 

the cable operator. While retransmission consent 

and must-carry are distinct and function separately, 

they are related in that commercial broadcasters are 

required to choose once every three years, on a 

system-by-system basis, whether to obtain carriage 

or continue carriage by choosing between must 

carry and retransmission consent.’’ FCC Media 

Bureau, Cable Carriage of Broadcast Stations, 

https://www.fcc.gov/media/cable-carriagebroadcast-stations (last visited Oct. 4, 2017). 

17 47 CFR 76.64(h) (adopted in Implementation of 

the Cable Television Consumer Protection and 

Competition Act of 1992: Broadcast Signal Carriage 

Issues, Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 3003, 

paragraph 160 (1993)). 

18 47 CFR 76.66(d) (adopted in Implementation of 

the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 

1999: Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues; 

Retransmission Consent Issues, Report and Order, 

16 FCC Rcd 1918, 1932, paragraph 30 (2000)). 

‘‘Carry one, carry all’’ refers to the fact that DBS 

carriers are not required to carry any local broadcast 

stations in a market, but must carry all of them 

upon request if any are carried (with certain narrow 

exceptions). The DBS ‘‘mandatory carriage/ 

retransmission consent’’ regime otherwise functions 

in a manner very similar to the cable ‘‘must carry/ 

retransmission consent’’ regime described above. 

19By ‘‘generic’’ or ‘‘general,’’ we mean 

information that applies to subscribers or groups of 

subscribers generally (e.g., those residing in the 

same zip code; those subscribing to the same 

service, etc.) and is not specific to an individual 

subscriber. See 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC 

Rcd at 5275, paragraph 10, note 40. 

20 47 CFR 76.1601 through 76.1604, 76.1618, 

76.1620 through 76.1622. 

devices and other customer premises 

equipment provided to subscribers may 

be obtained from other sources, such as 

retail outlets, as well as a representative 

list of remote control models that are 

compatible with deployed customer 

premises equipment.8

3. In June 2017, the Commission 

issued a Declaratory Ruling (2017 

Declaratory Ruling) that interpreted the 

written communications requirement of 

one section of subpart T to be satisfied 

by electronic delivery of written 

material to subscribers.9 Specifically, 

the ruling clarified that the ‘‘written 

information’’ that cable operators 

provide to their subscribers annually 

pursuant to § 76.1602(b) of the 

Commission’s rules may be provided via 

email to a verified email address if there 

is a mechanism for customers to opt out 

of email delivery and continue to 

receive paper notices.10 The 

Commission found that section 632(b) of 

the Act grants the Commission authority 

to establish the means by which annual 

notices may be delivered to subscribers 

and to specify consumer protections 

with regard to the delivery of the 

notices.11 It concluded that the statute 

does not impose any limitations on the 

Commission’s authority under section 

632(b) to specify the means by which 

cable operators may deliver notices to 

consumers.12 The Commission 

determined that a verified email address 

is necessary to ensure that the written 

information is provided—i.e., made 

available—to subscribers, as is required 

by § 76.1602(b).13 The Commission also 

cited policy arguments that it found to 

be persuasive in support of interpreting 

the ‘‘written information’’ requirement 

of § 76.1602(b) to encompass electronic 

distribution to a verified email address, 

such as the positive environmental 

aspects of saving substantial amounts of 

paper annually, increased efficiency, 

and enabling customers to more readily 

access accurate information about their 

service options.14 The Commission 

concluded that electronic delivery of 

annual notices would greatly ease the 

burden of complying with these 

notification requirements for all cable 

operators, including small cable 

operators.15

4. As discussed in more detail below, 

parties responding to the Commission’s 

Modernization of Media Regulation 

Initiative ask the Commission to 

consider permitting electronic delivery 

of information required to be provided 

by cable operators to subscribers in 

writing pursuant to subpart T, 

consistent with the Commission’s 

findings in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 

and to consider other changes to the 

rules in subpart T. 

5. Carriage Election Notices. When 

the Commission implemented the law 

establishing the must carry/ 

retransmission consent regime,16 it 

adopted a requirement that each 

commercial television broadcast station 

provide periodic notice to cable 

operators electing either to demand 

carriage or to withhold carriage absent 

express consent.17 A similar 

requirement, applying to both 

commercial and noncommercial 

television broadcast stations, was 

adopted as part of the ‘‘carry one, carry 

all’’ regime for Direct Broadcast Satellite 

(DBS) carriers.18 In both cases, the 

election notice must be sent via certified 

mail once every three years by each 

broadcaster to each cable system and 

DBS carrier serving the station’s market. 

A number of broadcaster commenters in 

the Media Modernization proceeding 

propose changes to this process, as set 

forth below. 

II. Discussion 

A. Modernization of MVPD Notice 

Requirements 

1. Electronic Distribution of Notices to 

Subscribers 

6. We propose to adopt a rule that 

would allow various types of generic 

written communications from cable 

operators to subscribers to be delivered 

electronically, if they are sent to a 

verified email address and the cable 

operator complies with other consumer 

safeguards.19 This includes generic 

written information provided to 

consumers about the deletion or 

repositioning of broadcast signals 

(§ 76.1601); general information about 

services offered (§ 76.1602); rate and 

service changes (§ 76.1603); charges for 

customer service changes (§ 76.1604); 

basic tier availability (§ 76.1618); 

availability of signals (§ 76.1620); 

equipment compatibility offer 

(§ 76.1621); and consumer education 

program on compatibility (§ 76.1622).20

Consistent with the Commission’s 

clarification in the 2017 Declaratory 

Ruling that written information required 

under § 76.1602(b) can be sent via email 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2122 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

21 Id. secs. 76.1603 through 76.1604, 76.1618; 47 

U.S.C. 551(a)(1), 338(i), 573(c)(1)(a). 

22Comments of NCTA—The internet and 

Television Association, at 4–5 (NCTA Comments). 

23Reply Comments of the American Cable 

Association, at 9 (ACA Reply). ACA asks the 

Commission to launch a rulemaking to update 

outdated subscriber notification requirements. See 

Comments of the American Cable Association, at 

18–26 (ACA Comments). 

24ACA Reply at 9. 

25ACA Comments at 19. 

26Reply Comments of Verizon, at 6 (Verizon 

Reply). 

27Reply Comments of Frontier Communications 

Corp., at 6 (Frontier Reply). 

28 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5273, 

paragraph 7. 

29 47 U.S.C. 552(b). 

30See id. 

31See id. sec. 552(c). See also 2017 Declaratory 

Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5273, note 27; 

Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of 

the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Report and 

Order, 14 FCC Rcd 5296, 5363, paragraph 156 

(1999) (‘‘[N]otices of rate changes provided to 

subscribers through written announcements on the 

cable system or in the newspaper will be presumed 

sufficient.’’). 

32See 47 CFR 76.1603(e). See also NCTA 

Comments at 7–8 (requesting that the Commission 

clarify that a written notice for purposes of 

§ 76.1603 includes an electronic notice); Frontier 

Reply at 8 (same). 

33 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5272, 

paragraph 6. 

34See 47 U.S.C. 552(c). 

35 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, 

paragraph 9. 

to a verified email address with 

inclusion of an opt-out mechanism, we 

tentatively conclude to adopt a rule 

reflecting these requirements with 

respect to § 76.1602(b) and some of the 

other subscriber notices required in the 

rules listed above. With respect to 

notices that pertain to rate and service 

changes, charges for customer service 

changes, basic tier availability, and 

subscriber privacy,21 we tentatively 

conclude that these notices can be sent 

via email to a verified email address and 

seek comment on whether consumers 

should have to opt in to begin receiving 

these notices electronically. 

Alternatively, we seek comment on 

whether these notifications should be 

treated like the other ones in subpart T 

such that cable operators should be 

permitted to deliver these notices 

electronically, if they allow consumers 

to opt out of email delivery and 

continue to receive paper notices. 

7. In comments filed in the 

Modernization of Media Regulation 

Initiative docket, some industry 

commenters request that the 

Commission take steps to ease the 

burden of complying with the cable 

notice requirements, such as by 

permitting electronic distribution of 

written notifications to subscribers. 

NCTA asks the Commission to adopt 

more efficient, less costly ways to 

provide required notices, and it 

contends that cable operators should 

expressly be permitted to correspond 

with customers via electronic means, if 

the customer has provided the cable 

operator with an email address or 

contacted the cable operator using such 

means.22 ACA agrees with NCTA that, 

‘‘at a minimum, the Commission should 

clarify that the written notice 

requirement as it pertains to [customer 

notification] provisions can be satisfied 

via electronic notice.’’ 23 ACA posits 

that ‘‘electronic notification would 

provide welcomed relief to cable 

operators and other entities from 

paperwork burdens.’’ 24 According to 

ACA, modifying subscriber notification 

rules can relieve cable operators from 

undue burdens and reduce subscriber 

‘‘notice fatigue.’’ 25 Verizon agrees that 

‘‘electronic delivery should be available 

for required notices to subscribers.’’ 26

Frontier Communications Corporation 

(Frontier) supports reform of ‘‘outdated 

notice requirements that were created 

before companies had websites and 

before customers had email.’’ 27

8. We tentatively conclude that 

permitting cable operators to deliver the 

aforementioned subscriber notices by 

email would serve the public interest. 

We believe that the policy 

considerations that the Commission 

found persuasive in the 2017 

Declaratory Ruling clarifying that the 

annual notices required under 

§ 76.1602(b) may be delivered 

electronically apply equally with 

respect to other subscriber notices 

required in subpart T of the rules, and 

we seek comment on our tentative 

conclusion that the public interest 

would be served by our proposal. We 

note that no party in the media 

modernization proceeding has opposed 

the cable industry’s request to permit 

electronic distribution of notices to 

subscribers. 

9. In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the 

Commission concluded that it has 

authority to establish the means by 

which subpart T notices may be 

delivered to subscribers and to specify 

consumer protections with regard to the 

delivery of the notices.28 As noted 

above, section 632(b) of the Act 

provides the Commission with broad 

authority to ‘‘establish standards by 

which cable operators may fulfill their 

customer service requirements.’’ 29

Moreover, the statute does not impose 

limitations on the Commission’s 

authority to specify the means by which 

cable operators may deliver notices to or 

otherwise communicate with consumers 

(including communications about bills 

and refunds).30 Because the 

Commission has authority to establish 

standards governing communications 

between cable operators and 

subscribers, and email is one such 

method of communication, we believe 

permitting cable operators to deliver 

subscriber notices by email is consistent 

with section 632(b). 

10. A different statutory standard 

applies to notices of service and rate 

changes provided to subscribers 

pursuant to § 76.1603. Section 632(c) of 

the Act states that ‘‘[a] cable operator 

may provide notice of service and rate 

changes to subscribers using any 

reasonable written means at its sole 

discretion.’’ 31 Section 76.1603, which 

implements section 632(c), also states 

that notice of rate or service changes can 

be made by any reasonable written 

means at the discretion of the cable 

operator.32 We tentatively conclude that 

‘‘reasonable written means’’ includes 

distribution via email to a verified email 

address. We tentatively find that 

permitting cable operators to deliver 

notices about service and rate changes 

via email satisfies the ‘‘written means’’ 

requirement of section 632(c). As we 

have found previously, emails, by their 

very nature, convey information in 

writing.33 Section 632(c) further 

requires the written means chosen by 

the cable operator to be ‘‘reasonable.’’ 34

For the reasons described below, we 

tentatively find that to be ‘‘reasonable,’’ 

a cable operator must use a subscriber’s 

verified email address. We seek 

comment on these tentative 

conclusions. 

11. We believe that certain consumer 

safeguards must be put in place if cable 

operators are permitted to disseminate 

written notifications to subscribers 

electronically with respect to subpart T 

notification rules. First, we tentatively 

conclude that cable operators must have 

verified email contact information if 

they choose to deliver notifications to 

subscribers via email, and, if no verified 

email contact information is available 

for a particular subscriber, cable 

operators must continue to deliver 

notices via paper copies to that 

subscriber.35 In the 2017 Declaratory 

Ruling, the Commission determined 

that, for purposes of satisfying the 

requirements of § 76.1602(b), each of the 

following would be considered to be a 

verified email address: (1) An email 

address that the subscriber has provided 

to the cable operator (and not vice versa) 

for purposes of receiving 

communication, (2) an email address 

that the subscriber regularly uses to 

communicate with the cable operator, or 

(3) an email address that has been 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2123 

36 Id. 

37See id. at 5274, paragraph 9 (‘‘By requiring the 

use of a verified email address, we will ensure that 

the . . . notices have a high probability of being 

successfully delivered electronically to an email 

address that the customer actually uses, so that the 

written information is actually provided to the 

customer.’’). 

38 47 CFR 76.1601 through 76.1602, 76.1620 

through 76.1622. 

39 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5275, 

paragraph 10. 

40See id. 

41See id. at 5276, paragraph 10 (agreeing with 

commenters that providing a link for customers to 

identify their delivery preference electronically 

‘‘could also be efficient and convenient for many 

customers’’). 

42Commercial emails must include an opt-out 

option under the Controlling the Assault of NonSolicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003, 

15 U.S.C. 7701, et seq. (CAN–SPAM Act). Many 

commercial emails satisfy this requirement with an 

‘‘unsubscribe’’ link. 

43See also 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd 

at 5276, paragraph 10. The Commission also noted 

that, while providing an opt-out telephone number 

is a minimum requirement, ‘‘cable operators may 

choose to offer additional choices to their customers 

that are clearly and prominently presented in the 

body of the originating email.’’ Id. 

44 47 CFR 76.1603 through 76.1604, 76.1618. 

45 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5276, 

paragraph 11, note 46. 

46 47 CFR 76.1602, 76.1618. 

47With respect to initial and annual notices, 

NCTA notes that this detailed information ‘‘appears 

to be of little utility to customers and can become 

frequently outdated,’’ and that website posting 

would enable operators to provide more timely 

information in a less burdensome manner. NCTA 

Comments at 5–6. With respect to notice of the 

availability of the basic service tier, NCTA asserts 

that most customers would instinctively turn to the 

cable operator’s website for information about 

programming packages and channel lineups. Id. at 

8–9. See also ACA Comments at 23 (‘‘[T]he 

Commission should consider modifying its rules to 

allow cable operators to decide how best to convey 

statutorily mandated information about the basic 

tier to customers.’’). Frontier agrees that cable 

operators should be allowed to share any required 

annual information by posting the information on 

its website, giving subscribers the opportunity to 

opt in to email notification. Frontier Reply at 7. 

While acknowledging that, for the most part, the 

notices convey ‘‘important information for 

consumers to have,’’ ACA questions the benefit of 

delivering the information year after year. ACA 

Comments at 20. 

confirmed by the subscriber as an 

appropriate vehicle for the delivery of 

notices.36 We see no reason to deviate 

from the criteria identified in the 2017 

Declaratory Ruling, and we propose to 

adopt this as a definition of the term 

‘‘verified email address’’ as part of our 

rules. This definition was proposed by 

the cable industry, and we found that it 

set acceptable parameters for the email 

delivery of written material.37 We seek 

comment on this proposal and tentative 

finding. 

12. Second, we tentatively conclude 

that cable operators must provide a 

mechanism for subscribers to opt out of 

email delivery and continue to receive 

paper notices with respect to the 

following subpart T notification rules: 

Generic written information provided to 

consumers about the deletion or 

repositioning of broadcast signals 

(§ 76.1601); general information about 

services offered (§ 76.1602); availability 

of signals (§ 76.1620); equipment 

compatibility offer (§ 76.1621); and 

consumer education program on 

compatibility (§ 76.1622).38 In the 2017 

Declaratory Ruling, the Commission 

determined that to satisfy § 76.1602(b), 

cable operators must include an opt-out 

telephone number that is clearly and 

prominently presented to subscribers in 

the body of the originating email that 

delivers the notices, so that it is readily 

identifiable as an opt-out option, to 

ensure that customers continue to be 

provided information in a way that they 

will actually accept and receive.39 We 

tentatively find that it is necessary to 

allow subscribers to opt out of email 

delivery and to provide an opt-out 

mechanism that is clearly and 

prominently presented in the body of 

the originating email for purposes of the 

aforementioned notice rules in subpart 

T, and we seek comment on this 

tentative finding.40 Should we require 

that cable operators provide a telephone 

opt-out method as a minimum 

requirement, consistent with the 2017 

Declaratory Ruling? Or, should we also 

permit cable operators to provide the 

opt-out mechanism via an electronic 

link that allows subscribers to identify 

their delivery preferences electronically, 

as an alternative to providing the opt 

out mechanism via a telephone 

number? 41 We recognize that 

subscribers are accustomed to having 

electronic opt-out links available in 

commercial emails,42 and that, for many 

internet-savvy subscribers, an electronic 

link will be more efficient than a 

telephone number. However, in the 

2017 Declaratory Ruling, the 

Commission found that providing a 

telephone number ‘‘would be the means 

most universally accessible to customers 

that prefer not to receive their notices 

electronically,’’ and it specified this as 

the minimum requirement.43 Is there 

reason to deviate from that approach for 

purposes of our rules? To the extent we 

adopt safeguards that differ from those 

specified in the 2017 Declaratory 

Ruling, should we adopt such 

safeguards also with respect to the 

annual notices required under 

§ 76.1602(b) of the rules, or is there a 

reason to treat § 76.1602(b) differently? 

13. With respect to notices of rate and 

service changes pursuant to § 76.1603, 

charges for customer service changes 

pursuant to § 76.1604, and basic tier 

availability pursuant to § 76.1618, we 

seek comment on whether subscribers 

should have to opt in to begin receiving 

these notices electronically.44 Does the 

nature of these notices in particular 

necessitate that cable operators have an 

opt-in safeguard in place with respect to 

these notices? If so, what specific optin procedures should be required? Or, 

alternatively, should these notifications 

be treated like the other ones in subpart 

T such that cable operators should be 

permitted to deliver these notices 

electronically, if they allow consumers 

to opt out of email delivery and 

continue to receive paper notices? Are 

there advantages to both consumers and 

cable operators in having various 

notices treated in a similar manner? 

14. In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 

the Commission found that inclusion of 

a website link to the notice itself would 

be considered reasonable when annual 

notices are delivered via email, 

provided the link remains active until 

superseded by a subsequent notice, and 

would give customers flexibility to 

choose when to review the annual 

notices.45 We tentatively conclude that 

this finding should also apply with 

respect to any other subpart T 

subscriber notices that the Commission 

permits cable operators to send to 

subscribers via email, and we seek 

comment on this tentative finding. 

15. We also seek comment on whether 

we should permit cable operators to 

provide to subscribers notices of general 

information at the time of installation 

and annually thereafter pursuant to 

§ 76.1602 and information on basic tier 

availability pursuant to § 76.1618 by 

posting the written material on the cable 

operator’s website, in lieu of providing 

such notice to subscribers via U.S. mail 

or electronic delivery to a verified email 

address.46 NCTA, Frontier, and ACA 

identify these two requirements in 

particular as suitable for website 

posting.47 We seek comment on whether 

it is appropriate for these types of 

generic notifications to be provided to 

subscribers via website posting. We seek 

input on the benefits, both to cable 

operators and to subscribers, of 

permitting notices via website posting to 

fulfill these written notice requirements 

as well as any potential burdens this 

may pose to subscribers. Would 

subscribers benefit from having an 

option that allows them to access 

written material via the cable operator’s 

website at any time that is convenient 

to them, as opposed to either paper 

copies delivered to a physical address or 

email copies delivered to a verified 

email address? Would website posting 

lessen the burden on cable operators, 

and small operators in particular, to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2124 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

48Amendment of Section 73.624(g) of the 

Commission’s Rules Regarding Submission of FCC 

Form 2100, Schedule G, Used to Report TV 

Stations’ Ancillary or Supplementary Services; 

Amendment of Section 73.3580 of the 

Commission’s Rules Regarding Public Notice of the 

Filing of Broadcast Applications; Modernization of 

Media Regulation Initiative; Revision of the Public 

Notice Requirements of Section 73.3580, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, 32 FCC Rcd 8203, 8208–09, 

paragraphs 8–9 (2017) (seeking comment on 

whether to update § 73.3580 of the Commission’s 

rules to provide broadcast licensees with more 

flexibility as to how they inform the public about 

the filing of certain applications, including whether 

to allow posting of such notice on an internet 

website). 

49 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5276, 

paragraph 11. 

50 Id. 

51See NCTA Comments at 9. Although NCTA’s 

comments discuss only the privacy notifications 

applicable to cable operators pursuant to section 

631, we find it appropriate to also address similar 

statutory provisions applicable to other types of 

MVPDs. 

52 47 U.S.C. 551(a)(1). Specifically, section 631 

requires annual notice of ‘‘(A) the nature of 

personally identifiable information collected or to 

be collected with respect to the subscriber and the 

nature of the use of such information; (B) the 

nature, frequency, and purpose of any disclosure 

which may be made of such information, including 

an identification of the types of persons to whom 

the disclosure may be made; (C) the period during 

which such information will be maintained by the 

cable operator; (D) the times and place at which the 

subscriber may have access to such information in 

accordance with subsection (d) [of this section]; and 

(E) the limitations provided by this section with 

respect to the collection and disclosure of 

information by a cable operator and the right of the 

subscriber under subsections (f) and (h) [of this 

section] to enforce such limitations.’’ Id. 

53 Id. secs. 338(i), 573(c)(1)(a); 47 CFR 76.1510. 

54Our proposal is limited to responses to 

consumer complaints or requests, and does not 

extend to communications between cable operators 

and other parties, such as broadcast stations. 

55See 47 CFR 76.1614, 76.1619. 

56 Id. sec. 76.1614. 

57 Id. sec. 76.1619. 

58NCTA Comments at 10. 

communicate this information every 

year to each subscriber on an individual 

basis, while still fulfilling the objectives 

of section 632? 

16. On the other hand, would a 

website posting of initial and annual 

notices required pursuant to § 76.1602 

and information on basic tier 

availability required pursuant to 

§ 76.1618 ensure that subscribers are 

adequately informed? The Commission 

recently observed that ‘‘[t]he internet 

has become a major part of consumers’ 

daily lives and now represents a widely 

used medium to obtain information.’’ 48

However, in the 2017 Declaratory 

Ruling, the Commission rejected the 

request of the petitioners in that 

proceeding to permit electronic delivery 

of annual notices via other means 

reasonably calculated to reach the 

individual customer, and instead 

limited permissible electronic delivery 

to email.49 The Commission explained 

that allowing other means to deliver 

annual notices, such as placing a 

website link inside a bill, ‘‘could create 

an undue risk that subscribers will not 

receive the required notices.’’ 50 Can the 

Commission’s concerns be mitigated by 

putting some consumer safeguards or 

additional requirements in place? 

Further, are there any requirements that 

the Commission can adopt to help 

ensure that subscribers without internet 

access receive the required notices? For 

example, if cable operators were 

permitted to include a website link to 

these notices inside a bill, should we 

also require them to include a telephone 

number that subscribers can use to 

request a paper copy of the notices? 

17. To the extent that the Commission 

does decide to permit website posting of 

these two subpart T notices, we seek 

comment on what requirements should 

be adopted to ensure this information 

can be easily accessed by consumers. 

For example, should the Commission 

require that an electronic link to written 

material posted on a cable operator’s 

website be clearly labeled ‘‘Important 

Subscriber Notices’’ and be prominently 

displayed on the initial screen of the 

cable operator’s website? This would 

allow subscribers to easily locate the 

pertinent written material without 

having to search the website. Should 

any website link containing generic 

written material include an opt-out 

mechanism that allows subscribers to 

identify their delivery preferences? 

Should the Commission specify that the 

link must allow a subscriber to find the 

same information that would be 

included in the paper copies delivered 

to the subscriber’s physical address or 

delivered by email to a verified email 

address? We seek comment on these or 

any other consumer protections that 

would be appropriate to impose in 

conjunction with website posting to 

ensure that consumers effectively 

receive the required notifications. 

18. Finally, as suggested by NCTA,51

we tentatively conclude that we should 

add a rule in subpart T that specifies 

that subscriber privacy notifications 

required pursuant to sections 631, 

338(i), and 653 of the Act may be 

delivered electronically to a verified 

email address, subject to the consumer 

safeguards discussed above. Section 631 

of the Act requires a cable operator to 

‘‘provide notice in the form of a 

separate, written statement to such 

subscriber which clearly and 

conspicuously informs the subscriber 

of’’ certain privacy protections.52

Section 338(i) of the Act imposes the 

same requirement on satellite providers 

and section 653(c)(1)(A) of the Act 

imposes this requirement on Open 

Video System (OVS) providers.53 We 

tentatively conclude that the 

Commission should interpret the term 

‘‘separate, written statement’’ in these 

statutory provisions to include notices 

delivered electronically to a verified 

email address and that the Commission 

should add a rule to subpart T codifying 

this interpretation. We seek comment on 

whether subscribers should have to opt 

in to begin receiving electronic privacy 

notices. Or, alternatively, should these 

notifications be treated like the other 

ones in subpart T such that MVPDs 

should be permitted to deliver them 

electronically, if they allow consumers 

to opt out of email delivery and 

continue to receive paper notices? We 

recognize the importance of privacy 

protections to video subscribers, which 

are reflected in sections 631, 338(i), and 

653(c)(1)(A). Are there concerns 

underlying the privacy notification 

requirements that suggest those 

requirements should be treated 

differently from other subscriber 

notifications? 

2. Responses to Consumer Requests and 

Complaints by E-Mail 

19. We propose to allow cable 

operators to respond to consumer 

requests or billing dispute complaints 

by email, if the consumer used email to 

make the request or complaint or if the 

consumer specifies email as the 

preferred delivery method in the request 

or complaint, and we seek comment on 

this proposal.54 Sections 76.1614 and 

76.1619 of subpart T require written 

responses to requests or complaints.55

Specifically, § 76.1614 requires cable 

operators to respond in writing within 

30 days to any written request by any 

person for the identification of the 

signals carried on its system in 

fulfillment of the must-carry 

requirements of § 76.56.56 Section 

76.1619 requires cable operators to 

respond to a written complaint from a 

subscriber within 30 days if there is a 

billing dispute.57 We seek comment on 

whether there are any other provisions 

in subpart T that would be affected by 

this proposal. 

20. NCTA asks the Commission to 

clarify that cable providers may use 

email to respond to consumer 

complaints when the consumer ‘‘has 

provided an email address on the 

complaint form and has not specifically 

requested a different format.’’ 58

According to NCTA, ‘‘[a]n electronic 

submission implicitly and reasonably 

calls for an electronic 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2125 

59 Id. at 11. 

60 Id. at 10–11 (citing 47 CFR 1.735(f) (permitting 

answers to formal complaints against common 

carriers to be delivered by email); and 8.13(c)(1) 

(permitting the same for formal complaints 

regarding open internet rules)). NCTA also notes 

that this would be consistent with prior guidance 

from the Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau allowing providers to submit responses to 

informal complaints against common carriers via 

email. Id. at 11, note 30. 

61Frontier Reply at 15. 

62 Id. Frontier also notes that letter or email 

communication is frequently made in addition to 

communication via other means, including by 

phone for ‘‘the most pressing and important 

complaints.’’ Id. at 15–16. 

63ACA and NCTA request that the Commission 

delete § 76.1630 of the Commission’s rules, which 

requires cable operators and other multichannel 

video programming distributors (MVPDs) to provide 

subscribers with notices about the digital transition 

in monthly bills or bill notices received by 

subscribers beginning April 1, 2009 and concluding 

on June 30, 2009. See 47 CFR 76.1630; ACA 

Comments at 26; NCTA Comments at 9. We plan 

to address this in a subsequent order in the 

Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative 

proceeding. NCTA and Frontier also request that 

the Commission eliminate or revise the 

requirements for cable operators to provide 

subscribers with notice of certain rate changes in 

§§ 76.1603 and 76.1604 of the Commission’s rules. 

See NCTA Comments at 6–8; Frontier Reply at 8– 

9. We plan to address these issues in a subsequent 

proceeding. 

64See 47 CFR 76.1621. 

65See 47 U.S.C. 544a(c)(2). Section 624A 

specifies that the Commission ‘‘shall periodically 

review and, if necessary, modify the regulations 

issued pursuant to this section in light of any 

actions taken in response to such regulations and 

to reflect improvements and changes in cable 

systems, television receivers, video cassette 

recorders, and similar technology.’’ See id. sec. 

544a(d). 

66NCTA Comments at 9. 

67See Implementation of Section 17 of the Cable 

Television Consumer Protection and Competition 

Act of 1992; Compatibility Between Cable Systems 

and Consumer Electronics Equipment, First Report 

and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 1981, 1989–90, paragraphs 

43–48 (1994). See also 47 U.S.C. 544a(c)(2); 

Implementation of Section 17 of the Cable 

Television Consumer Protection and Competition 

Act of 1992; Compatibility Between Cable Systems 

and Consumer Electronics Equipment, 

Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 4121 

(1996). 

68 47 CFR 76.1622. 

69See id. 

70Frontier Reply at 7–8. 

71ACA Comments at 25. 

72ACA asserts that section 624A of the Act 

references outdated technology, specifically 

requiring the Commission to prescribe regulations 

with respect to the compatibility of ‘‘videocassette 

recorders.’’ Id. at 23–24; 47 U.S.C. 544a(c)(2). 

However, as ACA notes, the statute also directs the 

Commission to periodically review and, if 

necessary, modify its regulations with regard to 

consumer education about equipment compatibility 

‘‘to reflect improvements and changes in cable 

systems, television receivers, video cassette 

recorders, and similar technology.’’ See 47 U.S.C. 

544a(d); ACA Comments at 24, note 93. 

73See NCTA Comments at 9 (arguing that the 

Commission should eliminate § 76.1622 because it 

is a ‘‘relic[] of long-outdated technologies and 

policies’’ and addresses ‘‘equipment that no longer 

is routinely used by consumers’’). Section 624A 

directs the Commission to ‘‘include such 

regulations as are necessary’’ to notify subscribers 

of certain consumer electronics equipment 

compatibility issues. See 47 U.S.C. 544a(c)(2) 

(emphasis added). 

74See 47 U.S.C. 544a(c)(2). Section 624A(c)(2) 

states that ‘‘[t]he regulations prescribed by the 

Commission . . . shall include such regulations as 

are necessary . . . to require cable operators 

offering channels whose reception requires a 

converter box—(i) to notify subscribers that they 

may be unable to benefit from the special functions 

of their television receivers and video cassette 

recorders, including functions that permit 

subscribers . . . to watch a program on one channel 

while simultaneously using a video cassette 

recorder to tape a program on another channel; . . . 

to use a video cassette recorder to tape two 

consecutive programs that appear on different 

channels; and . . . to use advanced television 

picture generation and display features; and . . . 

(ii) to the extent technically and economically 

feasible, to offer subscribers the option of having all 

other channels delivered directly to the subscribers’ 

television receivers or video cassette recorders 

without passing through the converter box.’’ Id. sec. 

544a(c)(2)(B). In addition, the statute requires the 

regulations ‘‘to require a cable operator who offers 

subscribers the option of renting a remote control 

unit . . . to notify subscribers that they may 

purchase a commercially available remote control 

device from any source that sells such devices 

rather than renting it from the cable operator; and 

. . . to specify the types of remote control units that 

are compatible with the converter box supplied by 

the cable operator.’’ Id. sec. 544a(c)(2)(E). 

response.’’ 59 NCTA also points out that 

the Commission already permits 

common carriers and internet service 

providers to respond to formal 

complaints by email.60 Likewise, 

Frontier calls on the Commission to 

allow cable providers to use email to 

respond to consumer complaints when 

the consumer has provided an email 

address on the complaint form or if the 

provider has an email address on 

record.61 Frontier contends that this 

would ‘‘cut down on unnecessary paper 

waste and postage and remove 

unnecessary costs.’’ 62

21. We believe that permitting cable 

operators to respond electronically 

using the same method as the consumer 

or the method chosen by the consumer 

gives both parties the opportunity to 

communicate via their method of choice 

and will allow cable operators to 

respond more efficiently to requests and 

complaints. We seek comment on this 

proposal. 

3. Other Subpart T Requirements 

22. § 76.1621 (Equipment 

Compatibility Offer).63 We propose to 

eliminate § 76.1621, which requires 

cable operators to offer and provide 

upon request to subscribers ‘‘special 

equipment that will enable the 

simultaneous reception of multiple 

signals.’’ 64 We seek comment on 

whether the requirements in § 76.1621 

can be eliminated consistent with 

section 624A of the Act.65 NCTA argues 

the Commission should eliminate this 

requirement because it is a ‘‘relic[] of 

long-outdated technologies and 

policies.’’ 66 When the Commission 

adopted the requirement for cable 

operators to offer subscribers special 

equipment with multiple tuners, it was 

intended to address ‘‘cases where cable 

systems use scrambling technology and 

set-top boxes,’’ such that subscribers 

need ‘‘supplemental equipment to 

enable the operation of extended 

features and functions of TV receivers 

and VCRs that make simultaneous use 

of multiple signals,’’ including ‘‘picturein-picture’’ features or the ability to 

watch one program while recording 

another.67 Today, consumers widely use 

digital video recorders (DVRs), rather 

than VCRs or television receivers, for 

recording features, and ‘‘picture-inpicture’’ features on television receivers 

are not prevalent. Given today’s digital 

technologies, we tentatively conclude 

that it is no longer necessary to promote 

the ‘‘special equipment that will enable 

the simultaneous reception of multiple 

signals’’ referred to in the rules, and we 

seek comment on this tentative 

conclusion. 

23. § 76.1622 (Consumer Education 

Program on Compatibility). We seek 

comment on how to appropriately 

update references to technology in 

§ 76.1622 of the Commission’s rules, 

which requires cable operators to 

provide a consumer education program 

on equipment and signal compatibility 

matters to their subscribers in writing 

upon initial subscription and annually 

thereafter.68 Among other types of 

technology, the rule refers to the 

compatibility of ‘‘videocassette 

recorders.’’ 69 Frontier asks the 

Commission to update § 76.1622, noting 

that a requirement to educate consumers 

on the interoperability of videocassette 

recorders no longer makes sense.70 ACA 

emphasizes that ‘‘[c]oncerns about TV 

receiver and VCR compatibility are, 

quite simply, no longer relevant to 

today’s consumer.’’ 71 We seek comment 

on how we can best modernize 

references to technology in § 76.1622.72

We also seek comment on whether there 

are any parts of the rule that are no 

longer necessary given changes in 

technology and, therefore, should be 

eliminated.73 We seek comment on 

whether the requirements in § 76.1622 

can be modified consistent with section 

624A of the Act, and, if so, how.74

24. Further, we seek comment on 

whether the Commission should 

consider any other changes to § 76.1622, 

such as scaling back the requirement to 

provide these types of notices annually. 

ACA asks the Commission to eliminate 

those parts of the rule that are not 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2126 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

75ACA Comments at 23–25. 

76 Id. at 25. 

77 47 CFR 76.66(d)(1)(ii). 

78 Implementation of the Satellite Home Viewer 

Improvement Act of 1999: Broadcast Signal 

Carriage Issues, Order on Reconsideration, 16 FCC 

Rcd 16544, 16576, paragraph 65 (2001). 

79See Comments of the National Association of 

Broadcasters, at 22–23 (NAB Comments); 

Comments of CBS Corporation, The Walt Disney 

Company, 21st Century Fox, Inc., and Univision 

Communications Inc., at 10–12 (CBS, Disney, Fox, 

and Univision Comments); Comments of Nexstar 

Broadcasting, Inc., at 16–17 (Nexstar Comments); 

Comments of America’s Public Television Stations 

et al., at 15 (APTS Comments); Comments of 

Meredith Corporation, at 2; Reply Comments of the 

ABC Television Affiliates Association, CBS 

Television Network Affiliates Association, and FBC 

Television Affiliates Association, at 10–11; Joint 

Reply Comments of the Named State Broadcasters 

Associations, at 7–8; Reply Comments of AT&T, at 

5–6 (AT&T Reply). Although some of these 

commenters proposed even broader changes to the 

must carry/retransmission consent system, in this 

docket we are focused exclusively on notice issues. 

80Nexstar Comments at 16–17; AT&T Reply at 5– 

6. 

81A failure to deliver a timely carriage election 

notice to a cable operator means that station 

defaults to must carry with respect to that operator, 

and loses the ability to negotiate for compensation 

for carriage of the station during that three-year 

election cycle. 47 CFR 76.64(f)(3). See also ACA 

Reply at 13 (arguing that continued reliance on 

certified mail is essential). On the DBS side, a 

failure to deliver a timely carriage election notice 

has the opposite effect, meaning the station defaults 

to retransmission consent and loses the ability to 

demand carriage during that three-year election 

cycle. 47 CFR 76.66(d)(1)(v). See also APTS 

Comments at 14–15. 

82See, e.g., NAB Comments at 22–23; CBS, 

Disney, Fox, and Univision Comments at 11–12. 

83CBS, Disney, Fox, and Univision Comments at 

11. 

84 Id. at 11–12. But see AT&T Reply at 4–5 

(arguing that this approach does not minimize 

burdens—it simply shifts them). 

85 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. 

mandated by statute, such as the 

requirement to provide this information 

to subscribers at the time of subscription 

and then annually thereafter, and to give 

cable operators greater flexibility in 

determining when and how to notify 

subscribers about equipment 

compatibility issues.75 ACA argues that 

the redundancy of annual notices ‘‘is no 

longer necessary, especially now that 

technology has moved far beyond what 

was considered cutting edge at the time 

the statute was enacted, and the 

equipment compatibility problems the 

requirement was designed to solve are 

no longer pervasive.’’ 76 We seek 

comment on whether the Commission 

should grant cable operators more 

flexibility with respect to these notices, 

as suggested by ACA. 

B. Carriage Election Notices 

25. We seek comment on how to 

revise §§ 76.64(h) and 76.66(d) of our 

rules to permit television broadcast 

stations to use alternative means of 

notifying MVPDs about their carriage 

elections. Currently, the rules direct 

each television broadcast station to 

provide notice every three years, via 

certified mail, to each cable system or 

DBS carrier serving its market regarding 

whether it is electing to demand 

carriage (‘‘must carry’’ or ‘‘mandatory 

carriage’’), or to withhold carriage 

pending negotiation (‘‘retransmission 

consent’’). The DBS rule also states that 

the certified mail letter be ‘‘return 

receipt requested.’’ 77 The Commission 

‘‘believe[d] that certified mail, return 

receipt requested [was] the preferred 

method to ensure that broadcast stations 

[were] able to demonstrate that they 

submitted their elections by the 

required deadline, and that they were 

received by the satellite carrier.’’ 78 A 

number of commenters have proposed 

changes to this process.79

26. We seek comment on what 

alternative means of serving triennial 

election notices would satisfy the needs 

of broadcasters and MVPDs, such as 

express delivery service or email. 

Nexstar, among others, suggests that 

notices could be delivered via email, 

and AT&T proposes allowing 

broadcasters to use express delivery 

services instead of certified U.S. mail.80

How would these or other approaches 

work in practice? As discussed above, 

we have in another context allowed 

delivery of certain customer notices to 

a ‘‘verified’’ email address, noting that 

such a notice will ‘‘have a high 

probability of being successfully 

delivered electronically to an email 

address that the customer actually uses, 

so that the written information is 

actually provided to the customer.’’ We 

seek comment on whether this approach 

would be sufficient in the context of 

carriage election notices, where 

significant legal and financial 

consequences arise from the failure to 

make a timely election notice.81 Is there 

an electronic equivalent to certified 

mail? Would the use of express delivery 

services, as proposed by AT&T, 

meaningfully reduce burdens on 

broadcasters? More generally, can we 

modernize our rules in a way that 

would minimize the burden on 

broadcasters, ensure that MVPDs receive 

the elections in a timely way, and still 

provide a mechanism by which 

broadcasters can demonstrate that they 

met the election deadline with respect 

to specific cable operators and DBS 

carriers? 

27. Some commenters request that we 

eliminate the requirement to send 

election notices to MVPDs by certified 

mail, and replace it with a mechanism 

for providing notice of carriage election 

online.82 For example, in their joint 

filing, CBS, Disney, and Univision argue 

that ‘‘[t]he system-by-system election 

requirement creates inefficiencies, both 

for broadcasters and cable operators,’’ 

incentivizes broadcasters to send 

duplicative notices, and is timeconsuming and costly.83 They contend 

that allowing stations to provide notice 

of elections online ‘‘not only would 

make it easier for broadcasters and cable 

operators to keep track of elections but 

also would be consistent with rules 

applicable in other contexts and in line 

with the Commission’s recent shift 

toward internet-based solutions.’’ 84 We 

seek comment on the pros and cons of 

this approach. In particular, what are 

the specific benefits to and burdens for 

both broadcasters and MVPDs of such 

an approach? Further, what rule 

changes would the Commission need to 

make to effectuate online notice of 

elections? For example, should all 

broadcasters be required to make 

carriage elections online or would this 

be one of their options in addition to the 

existing mechanism? Under an online 

election approach, how would 

broadcasters differentiate their elections 

to the extent they wish to make different 

elections vis-a`-vis different MVPDs? 

Finally, would these online carriage 

elections be placed in the broadcasters’ 

online public file or on another (existing 

or new) website that is publicly 

accessible? 

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act 

Analysis 

28. This document may result in new 

or revised information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 

13 (44 U.S.C. 3501 through 3520). If the 

Commission adopts any new or revised 

information collection requirement, the 

Commission will publish a notice in the 

Federal Register inviting the public to 

comment on the requirement, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 through 3520). 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 it might ‘‘further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees.’’ 

Ex Parte Rules 

29. Permit-But-Disclose. This 

proceeding shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance 

with the Commission’s ex parte rules.85

Persons making ex parte presentations 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2127 

86See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 

through 612, has been amended by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104–121, Title II, 110 

Stat. 857 (1996). The SBREFA was enacted as Title 

II of the Contract With America Advancement Act 

of 1996 (CWAAA). 

87See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). 

88See id. 

89 47 CFR 76.1601 through 76.1630. 

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 this proceeding should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

Filing Requirements 

30. Comments and Replies. Pursuant 

to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121 (1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http://

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th Street SW, TW–A325, Washington, 

DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. 

to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 

held together with rubber bands or 

fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 

must be disposed of before entering the 

building. 

Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 

20701. 

U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20554. 

31. Availability of Documents. 

Comments, reply comments, and ex 

parte submissions will be available for 

public inspection during regular 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center, Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW, CY– 

A257, Washington, DC 20554. These 

documents will also be available via 

ECFS. Documents will be available 

electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, 

and/or Adobe Acrobat. 

32. People with Disabilities. To 

request materials in accessible formats 

for people with disabilities (Braille, 

large print, electronic files, audio 

format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov 

or call the FCC’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Additional Information 

33. For additional information on this 

proceeding, contact Maria Mullarkey of 

the Policy Division, Media Bureau, at 

Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, or (202) 418– 

2120. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Analysis 

34. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA),86 the Commission has prepared 

this present Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning 

the possible significant economic 

impact on small entities by the policies 

and rules proposed in the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Written 

public comments are requested on this 

IRFA. Comments must be identified as 

responses to the IRFA and must be filed 

by the deadlines for comments provided 

on the first page of the NPRM. The 

Commission will send a copy of the 

NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA).87 In 

addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register.88

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rules 

35. This NPRM addresses ways to 

modernize certain notice provisions in 

part 76 of the Federal Communications 

Commission’s rules governing 

multichannel video and cable television 

service. First, the NPRM seeks comment 

on proposals to modernize the rules in 

subpart T of part 76,89 which sets forth 

notice requirements applicable to cable 

operators. In particular, the NPRM 

proposes to allow various types of 

written communications from cable 

operators to subscribers to be delivered 

electronically, if they are sent to a 

verified email address and the cable 

operator complies with other consumer 

safeguards. The NPRM also tentatively 

concludes that subscriber privacy 

notifications required pursuant to 

sections 631, 338(i), and 653 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended (the Act), may be delivered 

electronically to a verified email 

address, subject to consumer safeguards. 

In addition, the NPRM proposes to 

permit cable operators to reply to 

consumer requests or complaints by 

email in certain circumstances. Second, 

the NPRM seeks comment on how to 

update the requirement in §§ 76.64 and 

76.66 of the Commission’s rules that 

requires broadcast television stations to 

send carriage election notices via 

certified mail. 

B. Legal Basis 

36. The proposed action is authorized 

pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 325, 

338, 624A, 631, 632, and 653 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2128 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

90 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). 

91 Id. sec. 601(6). 

92 Id. sec. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the 

definition of ‘‘small-business concern’’ in 15 U.S.C. 

632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory 

definition of a small business applies ‘‘unless an 

agency, after consultation with the Office of 

Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 

and after opportunity for public comment, 

establishes one or more definitions of such term 

which are appropriate to the activities of the agency 

and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal 

Register.’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(3). 

93 15 U.S.C. 632. 

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

325, 338, 544a, 551, 552, and 573. 

C. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities to Which the 

Proposed Rules Will Apply 

37. The RFA directs agencies to 

provide a description of, and where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities that may be affected by 

the proposed rules, if adopted.90 The 

RFA generally defines the term ‘‘small 

entity’’ as having the same meaning as 

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small 

organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdiction.’’ 91 In addition, the term 

‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning 

as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ 

under the Small Business Act.92 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 SBA.93 Below, we 

provide a description of such small 

entities, as well as an estimate of the 

number of such small entities, where 

feasible. 

38. Cable Companies and Systems 

(Rate Regulation Standard). The 

Commission has also developed its own 

small business size standards, for the 

purpose of cable rate regulation. Under 

the Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable 

company’’ is one serving 400,000 or 

fewer subscribers, nationwide. Industry 

data indicate that, of 1,076 cable 

operators nationwide, all but 11 are 

small under this size standard. In 

addition, under the Commission’s rules, 

a ‘‘small system’’ is a cable system 

serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. 

Industry data indicate that, of 6,635 

systems nationwide, 5,802 systems have 

under 10,000 subscribers, and an 

additional 302 systems have 10,000– 

19,999 subscribers. Thus, under this 

second size standard, the Commission 

believes that most cable systems are 

small. 

39. Cable System Operators. The Act 

also contains a size standard for small 

cable system operators, which is ‘‘a 

cable operator that, directly or through 

an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer 

than 1 percent of all subscribers in the 

United States and is not affiliated with 

any entity or entities whose gross 

annual revenues in the aggregate exceed 

$250,000,000.’’ The Commission has 

determined that an operator serving 

fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be 

deemed a small operator, if its annual 

revenues, when combined with the total 

annual revenues of all its affiliates, do 

not exceed $250 million in the 

aggregate. Industry data indicate that, of 

1,076 cable operators nationwide, all 

but 10 are small under this size 

standard. We note that the Commission 

neither requests nor collects information 

on whether cable system operators are 

affiliated with entities whose gross 

annual revenues exceed $250 million, 

and therefore we are unable to estimate 

more accurately the number of cable 

system operators that would qualify as 

small under this size standard. 

40. Open Video Services. Open Video 

Service (OVS) systems provide 

subscription services. The open video 

system framework was established in 

1996, and is one of four statutorily 

recognized options for the provision of 

video programming services by local 

exchange carriers. The OVS framework 

provides opportunities for the 

distribution of video programming other 

than through cable systems. Because 

OVS operators provide subscription 

services, OVS falls within the SBA 

small business size standard covering 

cable services, which is ‘‘Wired 

Telecommunications Carriers.’’ The 

SBA has developed a small business 

size standard for this category, which is: 

All such firms having 1,500 or fewer 

employees. To gauge small business 

prevalence for the OVS service, the 

Commission relies on data currently 

available from the U.S. Census for the 

year 2012. According to that source, 

there were 3,117 firms that in 2012 were 

Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Of 

these, 3,059 operated with less than 

1,000 employees. Based on this data, the 

majority of these firms can be 

considered small. In addition, we note 

that the Commission has certified some 

OVS operators, with some now 

providing service. Broadband service 

providers (‘‘BSPs’’) are currently the 

only significant holders of OVS 

certifications or local OVS franchises. 

The Commission does not have 

financial or employment information 

regarding the entities authorized to 

provide OVS, some of which may not 

yet be operational. Thus, at least some 

of the OVS operators may qualify as 

small entities. The Commission further 

notes that it has certified approximately 

45 OVS operators to serve 116 areas, 

and some of these are currently 

providing service. Affiliates of 

Residential Communications Network, 

Inc. (RCN) received approval to operate 

OVS systems in New York City, Boston, 

Washington, DC, and other areas. RCN 

has sufficient revenues to assure that 

they do not qualify as a small business 

entity. Little financial information is 

available for the other entities that are 

authorized to provide OVS and are not 

yet operational. Given that some entities 

authorized to provide OVS service have 

not yet begun to generate revenues, the 

Commission concludes that up to 44 

OVS operators (those remaining) might 

qualify as small businesses that may be 

affected by the rules and policies 

adopted herein. 

41. Satellite Master Antenna 

Television (SMATV) Systems, also 

known as Private Cable Operators 

(PCOs). SMATV systems or PCOs are 

video distribution facilities that use 

closed transmission paths without using 

any public right-of-way. They acquire 

video programming and distribute it via 

terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban 

multiple dwelling units such as 

apartments and condominiums, and 

commercial multiple tenant units such 

as hotels and office buildings. SMATV 

systems or PCOs are now included in 

the SBA’s broad economic census 

category, ‘‘Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers,’’ which was developed for 

small wireline firms. Under this 

category, the SBA deems a wireline 

business to be small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. Census data for 2012 

indicate that in that year there were 

3,117 firms operating businesses as 

wired telecommunications carriers. Of 

that 3,117, 3,059 operated with 999 or 

fewer employees. Based on this data, we 

estimate that a majority of operators of 

SMATV/PCO companies were small 

under the applicable SBA size standard. 

42. Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) 

Service. DBS Service is a nationally 

distributed subscription service that 

delivers video and audio programming 

via satellite to a small parabolic dish 

antenna at the subscriber’s location. 

DBS is now included in SBA’s 

economic census category ‘‘Wired 

Telecommunications Carriers.’’ The 

Wired Telecommunications Carriers 

industry comprises establishments 

primarily engaged in operating and/or 

providing access to transmission 

facilities and infrastructure that they 

own and/or lease for the transmission of 

voice, data, text, sound, and video using 

wired telecommunications networks. 

Transmission facilities may be based on 

a single technology or combination of 

technologies. Establishments in this 

industry use the wired 

telecommunications network facilities 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2129 

94 47 CFR 76.1601 through 76.1630. 95 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1) through (c)(4). 

that they operate to provide a variety of 

services, such as wired telephony 

services, including VoIP services, wired 

(cable) audio and video programming 

distribution; and wired broadband 

internet services. By exception, 

establishments providing satellite 

television distribution services using 

facilities and infrastructure that they 

operate are included in this industry. 

The SBA determines that a wireline 

business is small if it has fewer than 

1500 employees. Census data for 2012 

indicate that 3,117 wireline companies 

were operational during that year. Of 

that number, 3,083 operated with fewer 

than 1,000 employees. Based on that 

data, we conclude that the majority of 

wireline firms are small under the 

applicable standard. However, currently 

only two entities provide DBS service, 

which requires a great deal of capital for 

operation: DIRECTV (owned by AT&T) 

and DISH Network. DIRECTV and DISH 

Network each report annual revenues 

that are in excess of the threshold for a 

small business. Accordingly, we must 

conclude that internally developed FCC 

data are persuasive that in general DBS 

service is provided only by large firms. 

43. Television Broadcasting. This 

Economic Census category ‘‘comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in 

broadcasting images together with 

sound.’’ These establishments operate 

television broadcast studios and 

facilities for the programming and 

transmission of programs to the public. 

These establishments also produce or 

transmit visual programming to 

affiliated broadcast television stations, 

which in turn broadcast the programs to 

the public on a predetermined schedule. 

Programming may originate in their own 

studio, from an affiliated network, or 

from external sources. The SBA has 

created the following small business 

size standard for such businesses: Those 

having $38.5 million or less in annual 

receipts. The 2012 Economic Census 

reports that 751 firms in this category 

operated in that year. Of this number, 

656 had annual receipts of $25 million 

or less, 25 had annual receipts between 

$25 million and $49,999,999, and 70 

had annual receipts of $50 million or 

more. Based on this data we therefore 

estimate that the majority of commercial 

television broadcasters are small entities 

under the applicable SBA size standard. 

44. The Commission has estimated 

the number of licensed commercial 

television stations to be 1,384. Of this 

total, 1,264 stations had revenues of 

$38.5 million or less, according to 

Commission staff review of the BIA 

Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro Television 

Database (BIA) on February 24, 2017, 

and therefore these licensees qualify as 

small entities under the SBA definition. 

In addition, the Commission has 

estimated the number of licensed 

noncommercial educational (NCE) 

television stations to be 394. The 

Commission, however, does not compile 

and otherwise does not have access to 

information on the revenue of NCE 

stations that would permit it to 

determine how many such stations 

would qualify as small entities. 

45. We note, however, that in 

assessing whether a business concern 

qualifies as ‘‘small’’ under the above 

definition, business (control) affiliations 

must be included. Our estimate, 

therefore, likely overstates the number 

of small entities that might be affected 

by our action, because the revenue 

figure on which it is based does not 

include or aggregate revenues from 

affiliated companies. In addition, 

another element of the definition of 

‘‘small business’’ requires that an entity 

not be dominant in its field of operation. 

We are unable at this time to define or 

quantify the criteria that would 

establish whether a specific television 

broadcast station is dominant in its field 

of operation. Accordingly, the estimate 

of small businesses to which rules may 

apply does not exclude any television 

station from the definition of a small 

business on this basis and is therefore 

possibly over-inclusive. 

46. There are also 417 Class A 

stations. Given the nature of these 

services, including their limited ability 

to cover the same size geographic areas 

as full power stations thus restricting 

their ability to generate similar levels of 

revenue, we will presume that these 

licensees qualify as small entities under 

the SBA definition. In addition, there 

are 1,968 LPTV stations and 3,776 TV 

translator stations. Given the nature of 

these services as secondary and in some 

cases purely a ‘‘fill-in’’ service, we will 

presume that all of these entities qualify 

as small entities under the above SBA 

small business size standard. 

D. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

47. As indicated above, this NPRM 

addresses ways to modernize certain 

notice provisions in part 76 of the FCC’s 

rules governing multichannel video and 

cable television service. First, the NPRM 

seeks comment on proposals to 

modernize the rules in subpart T of part 

76,94 which sets forth notice 

requirements applicable to cable 

operators. In particular, the NPRM 

proposes to allow various types of 

written communications from cable 

operators to subscribers to be delivered 

electronically, if they are sent to a 

verified email address and the cable 

operator complies with other consumer 

safeguards. The NPRM also tentatively 

concludes that subscriber privacy 

notifications required pursuant to 

sections 631, 338(i), and 653 of the 

Communications Act may be delivered 

electronically to a verified email 

address, subject to consumer safeguards. 

In addition, the NPRM proposes to 

permit cable operators to reply to 

consumer requests or complaints by 

email in certain circumstances. Second, 

the NPRM seeks comment on how to 

update the requirement in §§ 76.64 and 

76.66 of the Commission’s rules that 

requires broadcast television stations to 

send carriage election notices via 

certified mail. Through this NPRM, the 

Commission seeks to minimize the 

administrative burden on cable 

television operators, including smaller 

cable operators, by allowing electronic 

delivery of certain notices to 

subscribers, which will reduce the costs 

and burdens of providing such notices. 

We anticipate that this will lead to a 

long-term reduction in reporting, 

recordkeeping, or other compliance 

requirements on all cable operators, 

including small entities. 

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

48. The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant alternatives that 

it has considered in reaching its 

proposed approach, which may include 

the following four alternatives (among 

others): ‘‘(1) the establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance and reporting requirements 

under the rule for such small entities; 

(3) the use of performance, rather than 

design standards; and (4) an exemption 

from coverage of the rule, or any part 

thereof, for small entities.’’ 95

49. The Commission expects to more 

fully consider the economic impact on 

small entities following its review of 

comments filed in response to the 

NPRM and this IRFA. Generally, the 

NPRM seeks comment on: A proposal to 

adopt a rule allowing generic written 

communications from cable operators to 

subscribers required by subpart T to be 

delivered to a verified email address; a 

proposal to require an opt-out 

mechanism enabling customers to 

continue receiving paper notices for 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2130 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

certain notices, and on whether to 

require consumers to opt in to electronic 

delivery for other notices; whether to 

permit cable operators to provide 

certain written notices to subscribers by 

posting the written material on the cable 

operator’s website; a proposal to adopt 

a rule specifying that cable, satellite, 

and open video system subscriber 

privacy notifications required pursuant 

to sections 631, 338(i), and 653 of the 

Communications Act may be delivered 

via email, subject to consumer 

safeguards; a proposal to allow cable 

operators to respond to consumer 

requests or billing dispute complaints 

by email, if the consumer used email to 

make the request or complaint or if the 

consumer specifies email as the 

preferred delivery method in the request 

or complaint; whether to adopt other 

proposals to update subpart T in light of 

technological advances and market 

changes in the cable industry; and how 

to update the requirements that 

broadcast stations send carriage election 

notices via certified mail. The 

Commission has found that electronic 

delivery of notices would greatly ease 

the burden of complying with 

notification requirements for cable 

operators, including small cable 

operators, and it is considering 

alternatives that may further reduce 

burdens on small entities, such as 

allowing website posting of certain 

notices. The Commission’s evaluation of 

the comments filed on these topics as 

well as on other questions in the NPRM 

that seek to reduce the burdens placed 

on small cable operators and other 

MVPDs will shape the final conclusions 

it reaches, the final significant 

alternatives it considers, and the actions 

it ultimately takes in this proceeding to 

minimize any significant economic 

impact that may occur on small entities. 

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rule 

50. None. 

51. Accordingly, it is ordered that, 

pursuant to the authority found in 

sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 325, 338, 624A, 631, 

632, and 653 of the Communications 

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

154(i), 154(j), 325, 338, 544a, 551, 552, 

and 573, this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking is adopted. 

52. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

including the Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 79 

Cable television operators, 

Multichannel video programming 

distributors (MVPDs), Satellite 

television service providers, Television 

broadcasters. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

Proposed Rules 

47 CFR part 76 of the Commission’s 

rules is proposed to be amended as 

follows: 

PART 76—MULTICHANNEL VIDEO 

AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 

■ 1. The authority for part 76 continues 

to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 

301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 

315, 317, 325, 338, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 

522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 

544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 

561, 571, 572, 573. 

■ 2. Add § 76.1600 to read as follows: 

§ 76.1600 Electronic delivery of notices. 

(a) Written information, notices, 

advisements or offers that are generic in 

nature and provided in writing by cable 

operators to subscribers or customers 

pursuant to this subpart, as well as 

subscriber privacy notifications required 

by cable operators, satellite providers, 

and open video systems pursuant to 

sections 631, 338(i), and 653 of the 

Communications Act, may be delivered 

electronically by email if the entity: 

(1) Sends the written material to the 

subscriber’s verified email address; and 

(2) Provides a mechanism to allow 

subscribers to continue to receive paper 

copies of the written material. 

(b) For purposes of this section, a 

verified email address is defined as: 

(1) An email address that the 

subscriber has provided to the cable 

operator (and not vice versa) for 

purposes of receiving communication; 

(2) An email address that the 

subscriber regularly uses to 

communicate with the cable operator; or 

(3) An email address that has been 

confirmed by the subscriber as an 

appropriate vehicle for the delivery of 

notices. 

(c) The term ‘‘generic’’ means 

information that applies to subscribers 

or groups of subscribers generally (e.g., 

those residing in the same zip code; 

those subscribing to the same service, 

etc.) and is not specific to an individual 

subscriber. 

(d) For notices that require an opt-out 

mechanism, the entity must include, in 

the body of the originating email that 

delivers the written material, a 

mechanism for the subscriber to opt out 

of email delivery that is clearly and 

prominently presented to subscribers so 

that it is readily identifiable as an optout mechanism. The mechanism may be 

either: 

(1) An opt-out telephone number; or 

(2) An electronic link that allows 

subscribers to identify their delivery 

preferences electronically. 

(e) If the conditions for electronic 

delivery in paragraphs (a) through (d) of 

this section are not met, or if a 

subscriber opts out of electronic 

delivery, the written material must be 

delivered by paper copy to the 

subscriber’s physical address. 

(f) In this subpart, any required 

written response to a subscriber or 

customer may be delivered by email, if 

the consumer used email to make the 

request or complaint or if the consumer 

specifies email as the preferred delivery 

method in the request or complaint. 

(g) This section applies only to 

written information, notices, 

advisements, offers or responses 

provided to subscribers or customers 

and does not affect communications 

between cable operators and other 

parties addressed in this subpart. 

§ 76.1621 [Removed] 

■ 3. Remove § 76.1621. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00151 Filed 1–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS