WPC(H 2BJ ourierCG TimesCG Times Bold&m PE37&PCG Timeset 4M (PCL) ROOM 224HPLA4MPC.PRSx  @\w><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxx T -ԍ Notice at 2772.>  Yc-DD 14. No commenter opposes our proposals to expand our waiver policy regarding terrain shielding to mutuallyexclusive applicants and to permit applicants to consider terrain shielding as a basis for resolving situations of mutual exclusivity. Commenters support these proposals as a practical approach to acceptance of applications that more realistically reflects  Y-a station's actual potential to interfere with another station. ghx T -ԍ See, e.g., CBA Comments at 4; NTA Comments at 34.g A few commenters object to our proposal to take terrain shielding into account when applicants raise it for the first time in amendments responding to deficiency letters. du Treil, Lundin & Rackley and the University of California submit that any terrain shielding request should be included with the  Y-initial application. x Te-ԍ du Treil, Lundin & Rackley Comments at 3; University of California Comments at 2. The University of California contends that this will minimize the number of mutually exclusive LPTV applications. While May & Dunne would permit an applicant to submit a terrain shielding showing during a 30day amendment period, it opposes the acceptance of terrain shielding showings submitted in response to a Commission action dismissing the application or otherwise raising issues concerning the technical  Y:-representations in the application. M:x T#-ԍ May & Dunne Comments at 710, 9 n.4.M Some commenters also propose changes to our existing  Y$-terrain shielding procedures. $Hx T&-ԍ du Treil, Lundin & Rackley contends that if the National Bureau of Standards Technical Note 101 is used, the methods should be fully described in the application. du Treil, Lundin & Rackley"&0*((&"  T-Comments at 3. Technical Note 101 is a publication of the National Bureau of Standards detailing an assortment of signal propagation methods and models suitable for use in differing terrain and other conditions. Hammett & Edison urges the Commission to give official notice to the Terrain Integrated Rough Earth Model (TIREM), arguing that it is superior to Technical Note 101. Hammett & Edison Comments at 1112. Cohen, Dippell and Everist contends that the Commission should require a detailed terrain analysis with regard to interference situations concerning fullpower TV stations, as opposed to the current policy of a limited terrain shielding study and a consent letter. It asserts that this would avoid any potential conflict in the future due to a change in the fullpower station's  TP-ownership. Cohen, Dippell & Everist Comments at 3. Smith and Powstenko suggests that the Commission adopt a more exacting definition of the minimum showing required of applicants  T -requesting terrain waivers. Smith and Powstenko Comments at 67. Also, MSTV/NAB would apparently limit the use of terrain shielding only between mutuallyexclusive LPTV applicants.  T -MSTV/NAB Comments at 2 n.3. In Commission Policy Regarding Terrain Shielding, 3 FCC Rcd 7105 (1988), we concluded that casebycase evaluation of terrain shielding "affords the administrative flexibility to select from among available prediction models one that applies to the topographic features in each case." The existing flexible guidelines have worked well in practice and we see no need to revise them. Moreover, we believe that modifications to our current policy would be at odds with our aim in this proceeding, which is to streamline the LPTV application process. We decline, therefore, to pursue further in this proceeding these suggested modifications to our current LPTV terrain shielding policy. "$p0*(( "Ԍ Y-ԙDD15. We will adopt the proposals advanced in the Notice regarding terrain shielding waivers. We believe that if intervening terrain prevents an LPTV applicant from interfering with other LPTV or fullpower TV stations or other LPTV facilities proposed in pending applications, the applicant should be permitted to take that situation into account, regardless of whether the application is mutually exclusive with another LPTV application. The proposals we adopt in this proceeding do not affect the nature of applicants' terrain shielding waiver submissions, nor the manner in which the staff evaluates such submissions, as  Y_-provided in the Commission's LPTV Terrain Shielding Policy Statement. LPTV applicants seeking terrain shielding waivers should continue to follow the existing criteria for  Y1-demonstrating noninterference based on terrain considerations, i.e., submitting either detailed profiles of the terrain in pertinent directions toward the protected signal contours of potentially affected stations or letters of assent from the licensees of such stations, agreeing that terrain shielding would prevent interference but without surrendering the right to be protected against any actual interference. Also, mutuallyexclusive applicants may now use either of these methods to demonstrate that their respective station proposals could coexist  Y -without an interference conflict. ` px T!-ԍ We reiterate that where two mutuallyexclusive applicants choose to resolve the exclusivity by agreeing that interference between their two facilities would not be likely due to the existence of intervening terrain, the parties will be responsible for eliminating any interference that might occur,  TP$-and the parties are expected to cooperate fully to that end. See Notice at 2772. Further, while we strongly urge applicants to fully address applicable terrain shielding conditions at the initial application stage, we will accept a satisfactory terrain shielding showing for the first time in response to a deficiency letter. We believe that this will facilitate the initiation of new or modified LPTV station operations by"c0*((" treating the omission of terrain shielding data like any other error in an otherwise substantially complete application and giving the applicant an opportunity to make appropriate corrections.  Y-DD16. In adopting the LPTV terrain shielding proposals in the Notice, we are simply  Y-removing administrative barriers that were necessary when the LPTV Terrain Shielding  Yv-Policy Statement was first established. Had the current LPTV application processing climate existed at that time, we would not have found it necessary to limit consideration of terrain shielding among LPTV applicants. In the more than five years since its adoption, our terrain policy has enabled the grant of more than 200 LPTV and TV translator stations that otherwise would not have been possible. The policy also has been successful in terms of interference protection. LPTV stations are not permitted to interfere with the regularly viewed signals and programs of fullpower TV stations. We know of no instance in which the grant of a terrain shielding waiver in the LPTV service has resulted in interference to the reception of another broadcast facility. Thus, our broadening of eligible LPTV applicants for terrain shielding waivers should not increase the likelihood that LPTV stations will cause interference to the reception of fullpower TV stations.  Yb-Call Signs  Y4-DD17. In the Notice, we proposed to amend our rules to permit LPTV stations to request fourletter call signs rather than the fivecharacter alphanumeric call signs that are currently assigned. We stated our belief that such a modification may be competitively beneficial to the LPTV industry and may reduce confusion to viewers, who are accustomed to fourletter call signs. We proposed to append a distinctive suffix such as "LP" to any  Y-LPTV fourletter call sign to avoid confusion with fullpower television stations. >x T:-ԍ Notice at 2774.>  Y-DD18. The Notice presented two options for assigning fourletter call signs. Under the first option, as proposed by CBA, fourletter call signs would be permitted only for LPTV stations that meet certain threshold requirements, including a minimum number of hours of operation and a given amount of locally originated programming, as well as other requirements currently imposed on fullpower stations such as the multiple ownership, children's programming, main studio and public file requirements. Alternatively, the second option would permit all LPTV stations to request fourletter call signs upon applying for a  Y-license. We stated our inclination to favor the second option. 2hx T #-ԍ Id.2 " 0*((#"Ԍ Y-DD19. No commenter opposes permitting LPTV stations to use fourletter call signs,  Y-and all parties specifying a preference prefer the second option. Rx Tb-ԍ See, e.g., Channel Eleven Comments at 1; CBA Comments at 78, 8 n.10 (although CBA in its  T:-petition for rulemaking had proposed the first option, its comments on the Notice indicate that it  T-would be amenable to the second option) ; Findlay Comments at 23; Hammett and Edison Comments at 12; May & Dunne Comments at 57; MSTV/NAB Comments at 810; MW TV Comments at 12;  T-NTA Comments at 56; NSU Comments at 1; San Bernardino Comments at 10; ReporterTimes Comments at 1; Byron W. St.Clair Comments at 45; Third Coast Comments at 45; University of California Comments at 1; Venture Comments at 12; VideoIndiana Comments at 23; Viking  TJ -Comments at 1; W43AG Comments at 35; WFXV Comments at 3.R Commenters contend that fourletter call signs will facilitate marketing and will be easier to include in ratings books  Y-and ratings surveys. They also argue that fourletter call signs will alleviate public confusion regarding the nature of LPTV stations; they submit that the current call signs can lead the public to mistake LPTV stations for amateur radio operations. In addition, W43AG and May & Dunne suggest that stations be required to originate programming before they can request  Y`-a fourletter call sign. \`Px Ta-ԍ W43AG Comments at 45; May & Dunne Comments at 67.\ This requirement would prevent TV translator operators from  YJ-making such a request. The National Translator Association ( NTA) submits that call signs are not a significant issue for TV translator operators, and notes that TV translator operators  Y -would prefer to have no identification requirement. C x T-ԍ NTA Comments at 56.C  Y -DD20. Most commenters, primarily LPTV operators, oppose the adoption of an "LP"  Y -suffix as unnecessarily segregating LPTV stations from fullpower television stations. T` x T-ԍ See, e.g., CBA Comments at 9; CBA Reply at 23; Findlay Comments at 23; NSU Comments at 1; Byron W. St Clair Comments at 45; Third Coast Comments at 4; May & Dunne Reply at 13; University of California Comments at 1; Venture Comments at 12; W43AG Comments at 35; WFXV Comments at 3.T They analogize that licensees in different broadcast services use fourletter call signs without any suffix requirement. For example, they note, a Class A FM station is not designated any differently from a Class C FM station, nor do AM daytimers have to distinguish themselves from fulltime AM stations. Some of these commenters suggest that if the Commission does require a suffix, the suffix should be "CT" (for "community television"), "TX" (as used in"f 0*(("  Y-the FCC TV engineering database), or "TV." x Ty-ԍ See, e.g., Findlay Comments at 23 ("CT"); Third Coast Comments at 4 ("TX"); University of California Comments at 1 ("TV"); W43AG Comments at 5 ("TV"). In addition, May & Dunne, Third Coast and WFXV suggest that the name of the LPTV service be changed to "Community Television." May & Dunne Reply at 13; Third Coast Comments at 4; WFXV Comments at 3. As  T-we stated in the Notice, the proposal to rename the LPTV service, which was originally advanced by  T-CBA, does not warrant further consideration at this time. See Notice at 2770 n.1. Hammett & Edison and MSTV/NAB support  Y-use of an "LP" suffix. c x T; -ԍ Hammett & Edison Comments at 12; MSTV/NAB Comments at 89.c  Y-DD21. Another area in which some commenters differ with the Notice deals with when  Y-an LPTV station should be eligible to request a fourletter call sign. The Notice proposed to award fourletter call signs at the time the LPTV license is applied for rather than at the construction permit stage. CBA and Byron W. St. Clair believe that an LPTV operator should be permitted to request a fourletter call sign as soon as the construction permit is  YJ-issued. a!J@x T;-ԍ CBA Comments at 89; Byron W. St. Clair Comments at 45.a NTA similarly supports awarding a fourletter call sign before a station becomes  Y4-operational. C"4 x T-ԍ NTA Comments at 56.C These commenters contend that early assignment of a fourletter call sign will allow the LPTV station to more effectively market itself to the public.  Y -DD22. All initial construction permits for LPTV stations will continue to be issued with a fivecharacter alphanumeric call sign. However, we will permit any LPTV station that so  Y -chooses to request a fourletter call sign, without threshold operating requirements, after  Y -receiving its construction permit. # x T-ԍ All initial LPTV construction permits will be issued with a fivecharacter LPTV call sign. TV translator stations appear to have no need for fourletter call signs and therefore will not be eligible to request them. We stated our belief in the Notice that only licensed LPTV stations should be able to apply for fourletter call signs because many LPTV  Y~-construction permits never become operational. C$~x T-ԍ Notice at 2774 n.24.C We recognize commenters' concerns, however, that LPTV operators need to have fourletter call signs as early as possible to effectively market their stations to the public. CBA suggests that an LPTV station be permitted to apply for a fourletter call sign at any time after issuance of the initial construction permit if the request is accompanied by a certification that a firm equipment  Y -order has been placed or that physical construction is underway at the transmitter site. % px T-&-ԍ See CBA Comments at 89. We note that while CBA proposes this alternative, it would prefer unrestricted assignment of fourletter call signs to permittees requesting them. We"  %0*((" believe that this limited restriction is not unreasonable in that it will not unduly burden LPTV permittees and will promote efficient use of Commission resources. Accordingly, a permittee requesting a fourletter call sign must include with that request a certification that it  Y-has placed a firm equipment order, which includes a down payment for such major components as a transmitter or a transmitting antenna, that physical construction is underway  Y-at the transmitter site or that the station has been constructed. In addition, permittees, as well as LPTV licensees requesting a fourletter call sign, must also submit the drug certification statement required by Section 1.2002 of the Commission's Rules. By a later public notice, a schedule will be established by which licensees and permittees will be able to apply for fourletter call signs. Those stations in operation for the longest period of time  Y -will have the opportunity to apply first. s& x T -ԍ There are now 1,400 licensed LPTV stations and an additional 1,300 outstanding LPTV construction permits, which represent a potentially large number of requests for modified call signs. Accordingly, we believe that a phased implementation of the new LPTV call sign policy is necessary to ensure expeditious handling of call sign requests and the avoidance of delays. A fair and flexible means of accomplishing this is first to accept requests from operators of licensed stations on the basis of years of operation. Once all station licensees have been afforded an opportunity to request a fourletter call sign, the opportunity will be extended to LPTV permittees. The certification requirement will effectively enable the Commission to award fourletter call signs to those permittees most likely to construct and operate their stations.s  Y -DD23. All LPTV fourletter call signs will include a suffix of "LP," (e.g., "WXYZLP"). We do not agree that the suffix will unduly prejudice LPTV stations, and we believe that such a suffix is necessary to distinguish LPTV stations from fullpower television stations so as to guard against public confusion. The commenters' comparison of the relationship between LPTV and fullpower stations to that of different types of stations in other broadcast services is inapposite. Different classes of FM stations are all regulated as part of the FM service, and different classes of AM stations are all regulated under the AM service. LPTV stations, however, are regulated as a distinct broadcast service from fullpower television stations. As such, they are not constrained to follow rules applicable to fullpower stations such as multiple ownership restrictions, children's programming rules, the prime time access rule, local public file requirements and main studio requirements. Moreover, they operate on a secondary, noninterference basis. We believe that the distinctive suffix "LP" is more appropriate than "TV," "CT" or other suggestions because it best reflects the longstanding denomination of the service and would not introduce new and possibly confusing terminology.  Y}-DD24. As we proposed in the Notice, requests for fourletter call signs will be handled  Yf-under the practices detailed in Section 73.3550 of the Commission's Rules. 'f( x T?%-ԍ Requests for modified call sign assignments can be made by letter to the Commission in accord with Section 73.3550. An LPTV operator may not request a call sign used by another broadcast station unless the stations are"P '0*((" commonly owned, or unless the LPTV operator has the other station's written consent. Also  Y-in keeping with the Notice, where a call sign is requested by more than one party, the first operator to file its request with the Commission will prevail. In the case of identical requests filed on the same day, the call letters will be assigned to the station with the longest continuous record of broadcasting operation under substantially unchanged ownership and  Y-control. H(x T-ԍ See Notice at 2774.H We also adopt the proposal of MSTV/NAB that a fullpower television station will prevail in the situation where a fullpower station and an LPTV station apply for the same  Y`-call sign on the same day. )X`hx Ty -ԍ See MSTV/NAB Comments at 910. In addition, the University of California submits that an LPTV licensee should be permitted to use the same call sign for all of its LPTV stations. University of California Comments at 1. We decline to adopt this suggestion, as we believe it would cause undue confusion to the public, Commission staff and other interested parties.  T-Several parties raise other issues not addressed in the Notice. du Treil, Lundin & Rackley proposes that applicants be permitted to request a change in the offset of another existing authorized or proposed LPTV or translator station. du Treil, Lundin & Rackley Comments at 4. Hammett & Edison makes a number of suggestions regarding antenna azimuths, upgrading of existing LPTV or TV translator stations not operating on specified offsets, type acceptance, the definition of how to  T-calculate the depression angle to the radio horizon, and distance and bearing calculations. Hammett & Edison Comments at 3, 711. San Bernardino requests that filing windows be set on a regular basis and that the Commission reiterate that LPTV service is secondary, and states its support for the  Tq-Commission's determination not to increase LPTV and translator power limits. San Bernardino Comments at 1113. The suggestions of Venture and Viking regarding mandatory cable carriage and retransmission consent are similarly not within the scope of this proceeding and will thus not be  T-considered here. See Venture Comments at 24; Viking Comments at 12. Similarly, an AM or FM radio station will prevail over an LPTV station applying for the same call sign on the same day.  Y -  Y -[K ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS ă  Y -Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis  Y -DD25. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for this item as follows.  Xe- I. Need for and Purpose of this Action:  Y7-DD26. This action is taken to relax the Commission's standards regarding acceptance of applications for stations in the low power television (LPTV) service, and to permit LPTV stations to request fourletter call signs. " )0*(("Ԍ X- II. Summary of Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the Initial  Y-Regulatory Flexibility Analysis: None.  X- III. Significant Alternatives Considered and Rejected:  Y-DD27. The Commission considered a lesser relaxation of the application acceptance standards. The Commission also considered not allowing LPTV operators to apply for fourletter call signs until after they are licensed.  Y2-DD28. The Secretary shall send a copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act  Y -(Pub. L. No. 96354, 94 Stat. 1164, 4 U.S.C.  601, et seq. (1981)).  X - OORDERING CLAUSE ă  Y-DD29. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that pursuant to the authority contained in Section 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), the Commission's policy changes set forth herein ARE ADOPTED, and Sections 73.3522, 73.3550, 73.3564, 73.3591, 74.780 and 74.783 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  73.3522, 73.3550, 73.3564, 73.3591, 74.780 and 74.783, ARE  Y- AMENDED as set forth in Appendix B below. The revisions to Section 73.3564 and 73.3591 relieve existing restrictions. As such, they are exempt from the effective date requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.  553(d)(1), and will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register. The revisions to Section 73.3522 will become effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The revisions to Sections 73.3550, 74.780, 74.783 and to the Commission's terrain shielding policy in the LPTV service will become effective 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register and subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget. DD FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Acting Secretary "!)0*((%"  Y-Q APPENDIX A  X-MList of Commenters ă  Y-  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  Y-  Y-Initial Comments  Yw-1.J Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc. and (# J the National Association of Broadcasters (jointly) (MSTV/NAB)(#  YI-2. CBS, Inc.  Y2-3. Channel Eleven, Inc.  Y -4.J Cohen, Dippell and Everist, P.C.(#  Y -5.J Community Broadcasters Association (CBA)(#  Y -6.J du Treil, Lundin & Rackley, Inc.(#  Y -7.J Findlay Television Corporation(#  Y -8.J Hammett & Edison, Inc.(#  Y -9.J May & Dunne, Chartered(#  Y- 10. MW TV, Inc.  Yz- 11. National Translator Association  Yc- 12. Northeastern State University  YL- 13. Office of Special Districts, San Bernardino County, CA (San Bernardino)  Y5- 14. ReporterTimes, Inc.  Y-15. Smith and Powstenko  Y-16. B.W. St. Clair  Y-17. Third Coast Broadcasting, Inc.  Y-18. University of California  Y-19. Venture Technologies Group, Inc.  Y-20. VideoIndiana, Inc.  Y-21. Viking Communications, Inc.  Y}-22. W43AG, Hopkinsville, KY  Yf-23. WFXVTV, Inc.  Y!-Reply Comments  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  Y-1. Community Broadcasters Association  Y-2.JMay & Dunne, Chartered(#  Y"-Other Correspondence  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  Yi$-1. Sherwin Grossman "R%)0*(()"  Y-Q APPENDIX B  X-PRule Changes ă Parts 73 and 74 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:  Xw- PART 73 RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  YI-1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows: AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334.  Y -2. Section 73.3522 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:  Y - 73.3522 Amendment of applications. (a) * * * (3) Subject to the provisions of  73.3525, 73.3572 and 73.3580, any application for a low power TV, TV translator or TV booster station may be amended as a matter of right during the application window filing period pursuant to  73.3564(d). If it is determined that a low power TV, TV translator or TV booster application is substantially complete but contains some defect(s) or omission(s), a deficiency letter will be issued affording the applicant 30 days to correct the defect. lR* * * * *  Y-3. Section 73.3550 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (f), (h), (j) and (n), as follows:  YP- 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments. lR* * * * * (b) No request for a new call sign assignment will be accepted from an applicant for a new station until the FCC has granted a construction permit. Failure by the permittee of a new station to request the assignment of a specific call sign within 30 days of grant of the construction permit will result in the FCC, on its own motion, assigning an appropriate call sign. All initial construction permits for low power TV stations will be issued with a fivecharacter low power TV call sign. lR* * * * * "=&)0*((*"Ԍ(f) Only fourletter call signs (plus an LP suffix or FM or TV suffixes, if used) will be assigned. However, subject to the other provisions of this section, a call sign of a station may be conformed to a commonly owned station holding a threeletter call sign assignment (plus FM, TV or LP suffixes, if used). lR* * * * * (h) Call signs are assigned on a "firstcomefirstserved" basis. Receipt by the FCC of a request for an available call sign blocks the acceptance of competing requests until the first received request is processed to completion. In the case of requests for the same call sign being received on the same date at the FCC, the assignment (if otherwise grantable) will be made to the station having the longest continuous record of broadcasting operation under  Y -substantially unchanged ownership and control. However, involuntary and pro forma assignments will not be taken into account in determining priority. If a lowpower TV operator and an AM, FM or fullpower TV operator apply for the same call sign on the same date at the FCC, the AM, FM or fullpower TV operator will prevail. NOTE: The provisions of paragraph (h) of this section shall not apply to a licensee requesting a transfer to another frequency where the existing and new facilities serve  YK-substantially the same area (i.e., where at least one of the stations serves both communities of license). lR* * * * * (j) The provisions of this section shall not apply to International broadcast stations, to stations authorized under Part 74 of the rules (except as provided in  74.783 of this chapter), nor to FM or TV stations seeking to modify an existing call sign only to the extent of adding or deleting an "FM" or "TV" suffix. The latter additions and deletions may be effective upon notification to the Commission. lR* * * * * (n) Where a requested call sign, without the "FM," "TV" or "LP" suffix, would conform to the call sign of any other noncommonly owned station(s) operating in a different service, the applicant must obtain and submit with the application for the call sign the written consent of the licensee(s) of such stations. V  Y!-4. Section 73.3564 is amended by revising the second sentence of introductory paragraph (a) and paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: "h$)0*((("  Y- 73.3564 Acceptance of applications. (a) * * * "Except for nonreserved band FM (except for Class D) applications, those found to be complete or substantially complete are accepted for filing and are given file numbers..." * * * Rl* * * * *V (2) The application must not omit more than 3 of the second tier items specified in appendix C, Report and Order, MM Docket No. 91347, FCC 92328, 7 FCC Rcd 5074 (1992); 57 Fed. Reg. 34,872 (August 7, 1992). Applications found not to meet minimum filing requirements will be returned to the applicant. Applications found to meet minimum filing requirements but that contain deficiencies in tender and/or acceptance information shall be given an opportunity for corrective amendment pursuant to  73.3522. Applications found to be substantially complete and in accordance with the Commission's core legal and technical requirements will be accepted for filing. Applications with uncorrected tender and/or acceptance defects remaining after the opportunity for corrective amendment will be dismissed with no further opportunity for corrective amendment. In the case of low power TV, TV translator and TV booster applications, those found to be substantially complete will be listed on a Commission public notice as tendered for filing and given file numbers. Those that are not substantially complete will be returned to the applicant. If it is determined that a low power TV, TV translator or TV booster application is substantially complete but contains some defect(s) or omission(s), a deficiency letter will be issued affording the applicant 30 days to correct the defect. If the defect is not corrected within 30 days of the date on the deficiency letter, the application will be returned with no further opportunity to amend. lR* * * * *  Y}-5. Section 73.3591 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:  YO- 73.3591 Grants without hearing. lR* * * * * (b) In making its determinations pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, the FCC will not consider any other application, or any application if amended so as to require a new file number, as being mutually exclusive or in conflict with the application under consideration unless such other application was substantially complete, and tendered for filing by: lR* * * * * "<&)0*((*" Part 74 Experimental, auxiliary, and special broadcast and other program distributional services  Y-6. The authority citation for Part 74 continues to read as follows: AUTHORITY: Secs. 4, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, as amended, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, unless otherwise noted. Interpret or apply secs. 301, 303, 307, 48 Stat. 1081, 1082, as amended, 1083, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 301, 303, 307.  Y1-7. Section 74.780 is amended by adding the reference "Section 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments" after the reference to Section 73.3545 and before the reference to Section 73.3561.  Y -8. Section 74.783 is amended by redesignating paragraph (e) as paragraph (f) and adding new paragraph (e) to read as follows:  X-  74.783 Station identification. lR* * * * * (e) Low power TV permittees or licensees may request that they be assigned fourletter call signs in lieu of the fivecharacter alphanumeric call signs described in paragraph (d) of this section. Parties requesting fourletter call signs are to follow the procedures delineated in  73.3550. Such fourletter call signs shall begin with K or W; stations west of the Mississippi River will be assigned an initial letter K and stations east of the Mississippi River will be assigned an initial letter W. The fourletter call sign will be followed by the suffix "LP." A party holding a low power TV construction permit who requests a fourletter call sign must file with that request a certification that the station has been constructed, that physical construction is underway at the transmitter site or that a firm equipment order has been placed. lR* * * * *