[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 14, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10204-10208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3711]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[WT Docket No. 99-168; CS Docket No. 98-120; MM Docket No. 00-39; FCC 
01-25]


Clearing of the 740-806 MHz Band; Conversion to Digital 
Television

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission adopts mechanisms and makes 
determinations intended to facilitate the clearing of the 740-806 MHz 
band to allow for the introduction of new wireless services, and to 
promote the early transition of analog television licensees to digital 
television service (``DTV''). The Commission adopts rules and policies 
that allow the private sector to determine the band-clearing mechanisms 
that will best suit broadcasters' and potential new 700 MHz licensees' 
needs. By this action, the Commission also builds upon the policies 
adopted in the Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding (``700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM'') in 
which it provided guidance regarding its review of regulatory requests 
filed in connection with voluntary private agreements that would 
accelerate the DTV transition and open the 700 MHz band for new uses.

DATES: Effective February 14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nese Guendelsberger or Bill Huber of 
the Auctions and Industry Analysis Division at (202) 418-0660 (voice), 
(202) 418-7233 (TTY), or Martin Liebman or Stanley Wiggins of the 
Policy Division at (202) 418-1310 (voice), (202) 418-7233 (TTY), 
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of a Third Report and 
Order (``Third R&O'') in WT Docket No. 99-168, adopted on January 18, 
2001, and released on January 23, 2001. The complete text of the Third 
R&O is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW, 
Washington, DC. It may also be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc. (ITS, Inc.), 445 
12th Street, SW, Room CY-B400, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 314-3070. 
The Third R&O is also available on the Internet at the Commission's web 
site: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2001/fcc01025. 
Alternative formats (computer diskette, large print, audio cassette and 
Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by contacting 
Martha Contee at (202) 418-0260, TTY (202) 418-2555, or at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b565854554f5e5e7b5d5858155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ef3fdf1f0eafbfbdef8fdfdb0f9f1e8">[email protected]</span></a>.

Synopsis of the Third Report and Order

    1. By this Third R&O, the Commission adopts mechanisms and makes 
determinations intended to facilitate the clearing of the 740-806 MHz 
band to allow for the introduction of new wireless services, and to 
promote the early transition of analog television licensees to DTV. The 
746-806 MHz band at issue has historically been used exclusively by 
television stations (Channels 60-69). The incumbent television 
broadcasters are permitted by statute to continue operations until 
their markets are converted to digital television, which is not 
scheduled to occur until December 31, 2006, and that date may be 
extended under certain circumstances. Congress has, however, mandated 
that the Commission commence competitive bidding for the commercial 
licenses well before the scheduled termination date of the DTV 
transition. In the 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, (65 FR 42879 and 65 FR 
42960, July 12, 2000), the Commission provided guidance on its review 
of applications for approval of regulatory requests associated with 
voluntary agreements accelerating the transition of incumbent analog 
television licensees and opening these bands for new 700 MHz licensee 
use. The Third R&O announces additional policies to facilitate 
voluntary band clearing agreements among incumbent broadcasters and new 
wireless licensees.
    2. Cost-Sharing Rules. The Commission concludes that it is not 
necessary or appropriate to adopt cost-sharing rules to assist in 
clearing the 700 MHz band. Based on the record, the Commission finds 
that the new 700 MHz commercial wireless licensees should be able to 
enter into cost-sharing agreements without Commission rules. Therefore, 
the Commission leaves all cost-sharing arrangements to negotiations 
among successful auction bidders in this band.
    3. Three-Way Voluntary Transition Agreements. The Commission adopts 
a general presumption, standards of review, and policies for three-way 
agreements among incumbent Channel 59-69 broadcasters and new 700 MHz 
wireless licensees that are similar to those adopted in the 700 MHz 
MO&O and FNPRM for bilateral agreements between broadcasters and new 
700 MHz wireless licensees. Three-way band clearing agreements would 
provide for TV incumbents in the 700 MHz band to relocate their 
operations to lower band TV channels that would be voluntarily cleared 
by the lower band TV incumbents. The Commission finds that adopting 
guidelines for three-way agreements similar to those established for 
bilateral agreements should help negotiating parties and serve the 
public interest by providing a measure of certainty regarding the 
conditions under which a regulatory request to implement a three-way 
agreement may be approved. The presumption the Commission will apply to 
three-way agreements will be the same as the presumption adopted for 
bilateral agreements. Thus, the Commission will presume that the public 
interest is substantially furthered when an applicant demonstrates that 
the grant of its request will both result in certain specific benefits 
and avoid specific detriments. To obtain this presumption, an applicant 
must first demonstrate that grant of its request would result in one of 
the following: (i) Make new or

[[Page 10205]]

expanded wireless service, such as ``2.5G'' or ``3G'' services, 
available to consumers; (ii) clear commercial frequencies that enable 
provision of public safety services; or (iii) result in the provision 
of wireless service to rural or other underserved communities. To 
obtain the presumption, the applicant must also show that grant of its 
request would not result in any one of the following: (i) The loss of 
any of the four stations in the designated market area with the largest 
audience share; (ii) the loss of the sole service licensed to the local 
community; or (iii) the loss of a community's sole service on a channel 
reserved for noncommercial educational broadcast service.
    4. As was stated in the 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, the presumption is 
not conclusive or dispositive. In specific cases where the presumption 
applies, for instance, the Commission will consider whether special or 
unique factors involving loss of broadcast service are sufficient to 
rebut the presumption. When the presumption is not established or is 
rebutted, the Commission will review regulatory requests by weighing 
the loss of service and the advent of new wireless service on a case-
by-case basis. In conducting this analysis, the Commission will 
consider all relevant public interest factors regarding the provision 
of wireless services, the acceleration of the DTV transition, and the 
loss of broadcast service. The Commission will consider as a relevant 
factor in its public interest determination, for instance, the extent 
to which a station's signal will remain available, after implementation 
of the agreement, to a significant number of its viewers in the 
licensee's service area.
    5. The standards adopted in the Third R&O for reviewing regulatory 
requests made in connection with three-way voluntary agreements will 
enable the Commission to weigh both the benefits associated with 
recovery of the spectrum for new wireless uses and any loss of service 
to the broadcast community. The same loss of service analysis will be 
applied to both bilateral and three-way band clearing agreements in 
light of the fact that they will contribute to the same process of 
facilitating the transition to DTV and clearing the 700 MHz band for 
new services.
    6. Although the factors involved in a loss-of-service analysis will 
be the same for three-way and bilateral agreements, their application 
to three-way agreements may in some circumstances require two loss-of-
service analyses to assure that effectuation of the agreement would be 
consistent with the public interest. In those cases, the Commission 
will do such an analysis separately for: (i) People in the service area 
of the relocation channel that is temporarily suspending service, and 
(ii) people in the service area of the Channel 59-69 incumbent. If the 
two signals-- i.e., the relocation channel's signal (Channel 2-58 
range) and the relocating channel's signal (Channel 59-69 range)--have 
been provided from the same location with the same coverage 
characteristics, the loss-of-service analysis would appear to be 
identical to that for a bilateral agreement, but with the focus on the 
loss of the relocation signal rather than the Channel 59-69 signal. 
Because the Channel 59-69 signal would continue to be available within 
approximately the same service area, the only loss the Commission would 
need to focus on would be that of the signal of the relocation channel. 
In other words, the Commission would need to ascertain that the 
presumption is met only for the relocation channel. In other 
circumstances, however, the Commission would need to conduct two 
separate loss-of-service analyses and each station involved should 
separately satisfy the requirements set forth to qualify for the 
favorable presumption. If one of the channels involved does not qualify 
for the presumption, then the Commission will make a public interest 
determination on a case-by-case basis. A three-way agreement may also, 
in some cases, expand a service area. Such expansion, which would 
generally tend to promote the public interest, would have to be 
considered in conjunction with any interference issues. The Commission 
will consider as relevant factors in its public interest determination 
the extent to which a station's signal remains available to viewers 
located within its previous service area, as well as the substitution 
of a relocating station's programming for the programming previously 
available to viewers of the relocation channel.
    7. Interference Issues. Interference issues may arise under a 
three-way agreement that do not arise under a bilateral agreement. 
Specifically, while a bilateral agreement contemplates that a 
broadcaster relinquish one of its two TV allotments, a three-way 
agreement involves the relocation of a Channel 59-69 operation into a 
lower band allotment, which may potentially give rise to interference 
issues with respect to neighboring TV stations.
    8. The Third R&O finds that no interference issues should arise if 
the relocating station's signal is to be broadcast in the same mode 
(i.e., the relocation involves an analog operation moving into an 
analog allotment or a digital operation relocating into a digital 
allotment) from the same location as the lower band incumbent's signal 
using the same or lower power and the same or lower antenna height. In 
all other situations the proposed change must satisfy the Commission's 
prescribed interference protection standards for digital or analog 
operations, as applicable, and the Commission will address each such 
proposed assignment on a case-by-case basis.
    9. A modification could, for instance, involve either the 
relocation of an analog operation or the relocation of a digital 
operation. If the modification involves the relocation of a digital 
operation either (i) into an analog allotment; or (ii) into a digital 
allotment, where the relocated station does not operate at the same 
location or with the same or lower power and the same or lower antenna 
height as the lower band incumbent, the Commission will require such 
modification to comply with the provisions of Sec. 73.623(c) of its 
rules. That rule section spells out technical criteria for DTV 
modifications, including minimum desired-to-undesired (``D/U'') signal 
ratios, which protect co- and adjacent channel DTV and analog 
assignments from interference. If the modification involves the 
relocation of an analog operation either (i) into a digital allotment; 
or (ii) into an analog allotment, where the relocated station does not 
operate at the same location or with the same or lower power and the 
same or lower antenna height as the lower band incumbent, the 
Commission will require such modification to comply with the provisions 
of Secs. 73.610 and 73.698 of its rules in instances where an analog 
operation may affect the operation of another analog allotment, and the 
provisions of Sec. 73.623(c) in instances where an analog operation may 
affect the operation of a digital allotment.
    10. The Commission declines to adopt a new ``no interference'' 
standard that would prohibit any new involuntary interference to 
existing licensees. The Commission believes that relocation proposals 
that can be achieved in a manner consistent with its existing 
interference protection standards should be encouraged so as to 
facilitate the congressional intent underlying the allocation of these 
bands for new wireless uses.
    11. The Commission will entertain negotiated interference 
agreements pursuant to Sec. 73.623(g) of its rules, which is limited to 
possible agreements between relocating DTV stations and any existing TV 
stations that are entitled to interference protection under the

[[Page 10206]]

Commission's rules. Pursuant to that section, parties may reach 
negotiated agreements, notwithstanding the fact that the agreements 
would result in increased interference to a DTV or analog television 
station above the minimum technical criteria for DTV allotments, 
provided that the station agrees in writing to accept the interference 
and/or to implement an exchange of channel allotments in the same 
community, same market, or adjacent markets. Under Sec. 73.623(g), the 
grant of such applications must be consistent with the public interest. 
These cases will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As with 
interference agreements negotiated under Sec. 73.623(g) in other 
contexts, the Mass Media Bureau will evaluate these cases in the first 
instance, and it is the Commission's intent that the significance of 
any service gains and losses should be considered seriously in the 
evaluation of whether the negotiated interference agreement should be 
approved.
    12. The Third R&O also confirms that broadcasters may file 
applications for exchanges of DTV allotments on an intra-community, 
intra-market, or inter-market basis, provided that the exchanges do not 
result in additional interference beyond the Commission's de minimis 
standard to other stations or that all affected stations agree to 
accept any additional interference that would result from the exchange, 
and that all other requirements of the DTV allotment rules are 
satisfied with respect to the application(s).
    13. The Third R&O notes that any interference-related requests in 
connection with a voluntary band clearing agreement will be considered 
together with the other regulatory requests to implement that 
agreement.
    14. Procedural Issues. In the Third R&O, the Commission makes clear 
its commitment to processing all regulatory requests associated with 
band clearing agreements as expeditiously as possible. The Commission 
also clarifies the procedures that will apply to such requests and 
adopts certain procedural changes designed to streamline the review 
process. Requests that require a change to the DTV Table of Allotments 
will generally be subject to existing procedures found in Sec. 73.622 
of the Commission's rules. Under certain circumstances, however, the 
Commission will not use a rulemaking proceeding to make a DTV allotment 
change. Moreover, the following principles will govern whether the 
Commission will employ routine part 73 application procedures or 
rulemaking proceedings, regardless of whether a DTV assignment is being 
exchanged with another DTV assignment, an analog TV assignment is being 
exchanged with another analog TV assignment, a DTV assignment is being 
moved to an analog TV allotment, or an analog TV assignment is being 
moved to a DTV allotment. Proposals submitted in connection with three-
way band clearing agreements where both broadcasters are licensed to 
the same community and the result will not be the dereservation of a 
noncommercial educational allotment, will be processed under routine 
application procedures (i.e., a rulemaking proceeding would not be 
necessary) and will be subject to public notice and comment procedures. 
In addition, proposals to change the community of license will be 
processed under routine application procedures so long as the 
relocating broadcaster complies with all community-of-license 
obligations and coverage requirements for both communities, and the 
situation for the community that is losing a station is consistent with 
the 700 MHz band-clearing presumptions. In both such cases, the Mass 
Media Bureau will evaluate these proposals in the first instance, and 
it is the Commission's intent that the significance of any service 
gains and losses should be considered seriously in the evaluation of 
whether the proposal should be approved. The Commission also delegates 
to the Mass Media Bureau authority to make minor, administrative 
changes to the analog or DTV Table to reflect changes authorized by the 
grant of applications, such as changing an analog TV allotment to a DTV 
allotment. In addition, consistent with the Commission's existing 
rules, broadcasters will be permitted to negotiate swaps of DTV channel 
allotments pursuant to application procedures, provided that they 
comport with existing policies (i.e., exchanges of DTV allotments on an 
intra-community, intra-market, or adjacent-market basis will be 
entertained, provided that the exchanges do not result in additional 
interference beyond the Commission's de minimis standard to other 
stations or that all affected stations agree to accept any additional 
interference that would result from the exchange, and that all other 
requirements of the DTV allotment rules are satisfied with respect to 
the application(s)). The Third R&O does note, however, that a 
rulemaking proceeding will be required in situations in which a 
broadcaster proposes to add a new channel allotment, to change the 
community of license of an existing allotment (except in the 
circumstances mentioned), or to dereserve an existing noncommercial 
educational allotment, and existing Commission allotment policies will 
be applied. The Third R&O also clarifies that in such rulemaking 
proceedings to modify the DTV Table of Allotments in conjunction with 
band clearing agreements, the proposals would not be subject to 
counterproposals from other parties, as is usually the case in 
broadcast allotment rulemaking proceedings.
    15. In managing the transition to DTV, the Commission has, as a 
general matter, prohibited broadcasters from terminating their analog 
service early, and has determined that analog television and DTV 
facilities should be licensed under a single, paired license. In the 
700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, the Commission decided to allow early 
termination of analog service to accommodate voluntary agreements. To 
effectuate that policy, the Third R&O clarifies that a broadcaster will 
not be jeopardizing its license by agreeing to relinquish one of the 
two allotments under its license, subject to prior Commission 
authorization, to effectuate a band clearing agreement. This is a 
narrow departure from the general principle that the DTV/analog license 
is a single license and thus that neither channel can be transferred 
separately. The Commission believes that this approach will, without an 
undue adverse effect on the public's overall receipt of broadcasting 
service, expedite the full commercial and public safety use of the 700 
MHz spectrum specified in section 337 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, and the transition to DTV. The Third R&O also 
clarifies that if as a result of a three-way agreement a broadcaster is 
left with only an analog television channel, it must convert to DTV by 
the applicable date set forth in Sec. 73.624(d) of the Commission's 
rules.
    16. Temporary Relocation to Channels 52-58. The Third R&O does not 
prohibit voluntary agreements that would result in TV stations 
currently operating on Channels 60-69 relocating temporarily into 
Channels 52-58, which will be subject to future licensing for wireless 
services. The Commission recognizes that there are potential benefits 
and costs associated with temporary relocation to Channels 52-58 
resulting from voluntary agreements. The potential benefit includes 
allowing the incumbent broadcasters the opportunity to continue 
operating, while clearing the spectrum for new wireless licensees. The 
Commission will consider any public interest costs in its review of any 
requests submitted in connection with voluntary agreements to relocate 
temporarily into Channels

[[Page 10207]]

52-58 under the standards that have been set out in this proceeding.
    17. Secondary Auctions. A secondary band clearing auction would be 
a mechanism to determine the price that would be paid by 700 MHz 
licensees to TV incumbents who agree to clear their channels in the 700 
MHz band. The Commission recognized in the 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM that 
a secondary auction mechanism may produce significant benefits, and 
does not depart from that finding in the Third R&O. The Commission also 
finds that the private sector is better suited to determine what 
mechanisms interested parties might demand and to implement a secondary 
auction in a manner that is most responsive to broadcasters' and 
potential bidders' needs. The Commission does not therefore intend at 
this time to conduct a secondary auction.
    18. The Commission will rely on private secondary auctions and any 
other such voluntary, comprehensive band clearing arrangements among 
new 700 MHz licensees and incumbent broadcasters that would result in 
the voluntary early transition of this band to new services. The 
Commission cannot know whether individually negotiated arrangements or 
private auctions will be the more effective voluntary clearing 
mechanism and supports giving parties a choice, so long as the approach 
is consistent with Commission policies and rules. Based on the record, 
the Commission finds that a privately conducted secondary auction may 
be conducted in a manner that would not interfere with the integrity 
and operations of the Commission's spectrum auction process. The Third 
R&O reminds parties that where a secondary auction leads to private 
band clearing agreements, the Commission must approve any regulatory 
requests necessary to the effectuation of such agreements.
    19. Collusion Issues. The Third R&O clarifies that the Commission's 
anti-collusion rules, set forth at Sec. 1.2105(c), do not prohibit 
participation in a secondary auction or band clearing agreements, but 
that parties need to keep those requirements in mind. For instance, to 
the extent that negotiating a band clearing agreement or the terms of 
participation in a secondary auction conveys information about bids, 
bidding strategies, or settlements to other applicants for licenses in 
the same geographic license areas in the Commission's auction, such 
communications would be prohibited while the anti-collusion rule is in 
effect, unless the parties have identified each other on their short-
form applications as parties to a bidding arrangement under 
Sec. 1.2105(a)(2)(viii). However, to the extent that such negotiations 
are not with other ``applicants'' for licenses in the same geographic 
license areas or do not convey prohibited information, such 
communications would not be prohibited under the anti-collusion rule 
and negotiations could continue after the short-form deadline. Many of 
the parties conducting and participating in private secondary band 
clearing auctions are not likely to be ``applicants'' subject to the 
Commission's prohibition on collusion.
    20. Accordingly, the Commission reminds parties participating in 
secondary auctions or entering into three-way agreements to remain 
mindful of their obligations under the Commission's anti-collusion 
rules. In this regard, the Commission notes that with respect to 
auctions of licenses in the 700 MHz band, a band clearing agreement or 
contract to participate in a secondary auction constitutes an agreement 
that relates to licenses being auctioned, and is covered by the 
disclosure requirement of Sec. 1.2105(a)(2)(viii). Disclosure of the 
parties to any agreements on short-form auction applications also 
provides a ``safe harbor'' against allegations that communications in 
connection with such agreements constitute communications prohibited 
under the anti-collusion rules. Where agreements are not reached before 
the short-form filing deadline, participants in secondary auctions or 
parties entering into three-way agreements should educate all involved 
in such activities about these obligations, and might consider 
establishing procedures to insulate individuals from others' auction-
related communications or taking other precautionary steps to prevent 
collusive conduct from occurring.
    21. Proposal to Cap Clearing Costs. The Commission will not adopt 
cost recovery guidelines at this time. The Commission believes that 
both voluntary clearing agreements and a private secondary auction plan 
would be more likely to succeed without the use of cost guidelines. 
Further, the record of this proceeding contains little detail about how 
to structure any such guidelines.
    22. Digital Must-Carry. Although the Commission did not seek 
comment in the 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM on the digital must-carry issue, 
a number of commenters urge the Commission to adopt DTV must-carry 
rules in order to encourage band clearing. The Commission finds in the 
Third R&O that the requests of commenters in this proceeding for 
adoption of various DTV must-carry rules have in most respects been 
resolved in Carriage of Digital Television Broadcast Signals, CS Docket 
No. 98-120, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, FCC 01-22, Paras. 52-56 (released January 23, 2001), as 
well as in WHDT-DT Channel 59, Stuart, Florida, Petition for 
Declaratory Ruling that Digital Broadcast Stations Have Mandatory 
Carriage Rights, CSR-5562-Z, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-23, 
Paras. 12-15 (released January 23, 2001). The Commission also defers 
consideration of other issues raised by commenters, such as the 
mandatory dual carriage of a station's digital and analog signals 
during the digital television transition, pending development of an 
improved record in the DTV Must-Carry proceeding.
    23. Other Relocation Proposals. Certain commenters argue that, 
should there be a ``lone holdout'' of an incumbent broadcaster in a 
market where substantial clearing has occurred, it might well threaten 
the success of the transition to DTV and the ability of new 700 MHz 
licensees to deploy rapidly new wireless technologies in this spectrum. 
Holdouts may be a sign of a market imperfection or failure that might 
impede the proper functioning of the market, and may prevent efficient 
outcomes of secondary auctions and band clearing negotiations among new 
700 MHz wireless licensees and incumbent Channel 59-69 broadcasters.
    24. In the Third R&O, the Commission cites its previous observation 
that in the majority of cases efficient spectrum markets will lead to 
use of spectrum for the highest value end use, and states its belief 
that voluntary agreements between broadcasters and licensees should 
result in the effective clearing of the 700 MHz band. The Commission 
notes that this view is broadly shared by most commenters, which 
advocate a voluntary, market-based approach to clearing incumbent 
broadcast operations from Channels 59-69. However, the Commission will 
revisit this issue in the future if necessary.
    25. Other Proposals to Accelerate the DTV Transition. In light of 
the limited scope of comments on proposals regarding sharing of 
spectrum, the Commission concludes that there is insufficient interest 
to warrant adoption of rules of general applicability at this time.
    26. Band Clearing Relating to the Auction of Channels 52-59. The 
Commission finds that it is appropriate to gain additional experience 
with innovative, voluntary band clearing mechanisms before making 
judgments

[[Page 10208]]

about whether to extend them for use in bands other than those used for 
Channels 60-69. Thus, the Commission defers the issue of employing such 
mechanisms in conjunction with the auction of spectrum used for 
Channels 52-59 to its upcoming proceeding on service rules for this 
spectrum.

Procedural Matters

Regulatory Flexibility Act and Paperwork Reduction Act

    27. Section 213 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000, 
Public Law 106-113, 113 Stat. 2502, states that the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (as well as certain provisions of the Contract With 
America Advancement Act of 1996 and the Paperwork Reduction Act) shall 
not apply to the rules and competitive bidding procedures governing the 
frequencies in the 746-806 MHz band (currently used for television 
broadcasts on channels 60-69). Because the policies and rules adopted 
in the Third R&O relate only to assignments of those frequencies, no 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or Paperwork Reduction Analysis 
is necessary.

Ordering Clauses

    28. Authority for issuance of this Third R&O is contained in 
sections 1, 2, 4(i), 5(c), 7(a), 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309(j), 
309(k), 311, 316, 319, 324, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 614, and 615 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 
155(c), 157(a), 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309(j), 309(k), 311, 316, 319, 
324, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 614, and 615, the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2000, Public Law 106-113, 113 Stat. 2502, and 
Sec. 1.425 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.425.
    29. Accordingly, it is ordered that part 73 of the Commission's 
rules is amended as specified. Pursuant to section 213 of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000, these rule amendments are 
effective February 14, 2001. It is further ordered that the Petition 
for Rulemaking filed by Spectrum Exchange Group, LLC on April 24, 2000 
is granted to the extent discussed in the Third R&O.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcast services, Wireless telecommunications.

    Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR Part 73 as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

    2. Section 73.607 is amended by redesignating the undesignated text 
as paragraph (a) and adding new paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec. 73.607  Availability of channels.

* * * * *
    (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, an application 
may be filed for a channel or community not listed in the TV Table of 
Allotments if it is consistent with the rules and policies established 
in the Third Report and Order in WT Docket 99-168 (FCC 01-25), adopted 
January 18, 2001. Where such a request is approved, the Mass Media 
Bureau will change the Table of Allotments to reflect that approval.

    3. Section 73.622 is amended by redesignating paragraph (c) as 
paragraph (c)(1) and adding new paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:


Sec. 73.622  Digital television table of allotments.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(1) of this section, an 
application may be filed for a channel or community not listed in the 
DTV Table of Allotments if it is consistent with the rules and policies 
established in the Third Report and Order in WT Docket 99-168 (FCC 01-
25), adopted January 18, 2001. Where such a request is approved, the 
Mass Media Bureau will change the DTV Table of Allotments to reflect 
that approval.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-3711 Filed 2-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>