Source: https://www.fcc.gov/print/node/58253
Timestamp: 2015-11-27 19:06:42
Document Index: 40901374

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 621', '§ 621', '§ 73', '§ 51', '§ 73', '§ 621', '§ 553']

Rosenworcel Statement [1]	Download Options
Word Document [2]PDF Document [3]Text Document [4]	Released: November 1, 2013
1 According to its website, ATSC is an international, non-profit organization developing voluntary standards for digital television. The ATSC member organizations represent the broadcast, broadcast equipment, motion picture, consumer electronics, computer, cable, satellite, and semiconductor industries. ATSC creates and fosters implementation of voluntary Standards and Recommended Practices to advance digital television broadcasting and to facilitate interoperability with other media. See http://www.atsc.org/aboutatsc.html [5].2 See ATSC A/85:2013 “ATSC Recommended Practice: Techniques for Establishing and Maintaining Audio Loudness for Digital Television,” (March 12, 2013) (Successor RP). The Successor RP, which replaces A/85:2011“ATSC Recommended Practice: Techniques for Establishing and Maintaining Audio Loudness for Digital Television,” (July 25, 2011) (Current RP), is available on the ATSC website at: http://www.atsc.org/cms/standards/A_85-2013.pdf [6].3 See 47 U.S.C. § 621(a); see also Implementation of the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act, MB Docket No. 11-93, Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd 17222, 17236, ¶ 20 (2011) (CALM Act Report and Order).4 See infra ¶ 7.
5 See generally CALM Act Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd 17222.6 47 U.S.C. § 621(a).7 See Current RP, which was incorporated as it existed on the date of its approval by the Director of the Federal Register (i.e., Dec. 13, 2012). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.8000(a), (b)(5) and 76.602(a), (b)(2); 1 C.F.R. § 51.1(f) (“Incorporation by reference of a publication is limited to the edition of the publication that is approved. Future amendments or revisions of the publication are not included.”). The Current RP is available at the ATSC website: http://www.atsc.org/cms/standards/a_85-2011a.pdf [7].8 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.682(e) and 76.607.9 47 U.S.C. § 621(a). See CALM Act Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd at 17236, ¶ 20 (observing that “Section 2(a) mandates that the required regulation incorporate by reference and make mandatory “any successor” to the RP, affording the Commission no discretion in this regard.”).10 See supra note 2.11 The ITU is a specialized agency of the United Nations whose goal is to promote international cooperation in the efficient use of telecommunications, including the use of the radio frequency spectrum. The ITU publishes technical recommendations concerning various aspects of radio communication technology. These recommendations are subject to an international peer review and approval process in which the Commission participates.12 See Letter from Mark S. Richer, ATSC President, to Alison Neplokh, Chief Engineer, Media Bureau, FCC, at 1 (dated April 5, 2013) (ATSC April 5 Letter) (stating that “the revised version of A/85 includes an update of the reference to the [ITU] recommendation for ‘Algorithms to measure audio programme loudness and true-peak audio level.’ The revised A/85 now references ITU-R BS.1770-3.”). As explained in the CALM Act Report and Order, the ITU-R BS.1770 measurement algorithm provides a numerical value that indicates the perceived loudness of the content (measured in units of LKFS – loudness, K-weighted, relative to full scale) by averaging the loudness of audio signals in all channels over the duration of the content. See CALM Act Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd at 17228, ¶ 5.13 Id. (“Version 3 of BS.1770, adds ‘gating’ (excluding low level passages from the measured value) to the measurement algorithm.”).14 See infra note 22.15 See ATSC April 5 Letter at 1. ATSC explains that version 3 of BS.1770 also “includes some minor editorial updates to the loudness measurement text and a minor correction to the true-peak measurement algorithm.” Id. ATSC also explains that “[b]eyond the reference change, A/85 now includes improved guidance for measuring the (continued….)
We recognize that, as a result of the proposed changes, parties20 may need a software or device upgrade for their equipment. Accordingly, we believe that it is appropriate to afford a reasonable amount of time for affected parties to implement the Successor RP. We are mindful of the fact that many such parties have recently purchased new equipment to comply with the Commission’s rulesimplementing the statute, which took effect on December 13, 2012. Therefore, we seek comment aboutthe costs and timing associated with upgrading existing equipment to comply with the Successor RP. Based on the limited scope of the rule changes raised by the Successor RP, we believe an effective date of one year from the release date of the Report and Order in the instant proceeding would provide enough time to implement any necessary equipment upgrades. We seek comment on this proposal, including the costs and benefits of this proposed implementation deadline. In particular, we seek specific comment from affected parties who have already purchased equipment that is not easily upgradable or for which implementation of the Successor RP would be significantly burdensome for some other reason. We also seek comment on whether small TV stations and MVPDs, as a class, may need more time to implement the Successor RP.21 In setting an effective date, we seek to ensure that consumers can benefit in a timely (Continued from previous page) loudness of surround programming in both its multichannel format and in its 2-channel downmix.… In addition, A/85 is now specific about the differences between loudness and dynamic range.” Id.16 Id. (citing 5 U.S.C. § 553(b)(B) (providing that Administrative Procedure Act’s notice and comment requirements do not apply “when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest”).17 Id.18 See supra note 13.19 See Appendix A – Proposed Rules.20 In addition to broadcasters and MVPDs, parties affected by these rules may include programmers and other third parties that may be performing the loudness measurements on which stations and MVPDs rely.21 The CALM Act Report and Order defines a “small broadcast station” and a “small MVPD system” for purposes of a streamlined financial hardship waiver to obtain a one-year waiver of the effective date of the rules. See CALM Act (continued….)
fashion from the improved method of controlling loudness,22 while avoiding imposing unreasonable burdens on affected parties. If a commenter suggests that any party should have more time to implement the Successor RP, then we ask that commenter to explain in detail the reasons for needing the additional time and why that need outweighs the effect that the longer implementation timeline would have on consumers.
Although stations and MVPDs must continue to comply with the 2011 A/85 RP that is currently incorporated by reference in the rules,23 we waive our rules to permit stations and MVPDs to implement the Successor RP early. We expect that some stations and MVPDs may be able and willing to implement the Successor RP in less than the year we propose to allow for compliance with the new standard. Therefore, to the extent it may be necessary to expressly permit such early adoption of the Successor RP, and in light of the fact that the CALM Act makes mandatory the revision of our rules proposed herein, we hereby waive our rules to allow stations and MVPDs to comply with our existing rules by following either the BS.1770-1 measurement method in the Current RP or the BS.1770-3 updated measurement method in the Successor RP. Although the change in the measurement method is minor, we believe that consumers may benefit from early implementation of the improved loudness measurement technique incorporated into the Successor RP, and allowing stations and MVPDs to demonstrate compliance at this time based on the new standard is accordingly in the public interest. Finally, we invite comment on whether the Successor RP raises any other issues that should be addressed in this proceeding.24
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA),25 the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA). The IRFA is attached as Appendix B. Written public comments are requested on the IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the first page of this document. The Commission will send a copy of this document, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). (Continued from previous page) Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd at 17253-54, ¶ 53-54. A “small broadcast station” is defined as a TV station with $14.0 million or less in annual receipts or that is located in television markets 150 to 210. A “small MVPD system” is defined as an MVPD with fewer than 15,000 subscribers (as of December 31, 2011) and that is not affiliated with a larger operator serving more tha