WPC3 2MBERKZ3|a X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"i~'^5>I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\HP4M (PCL) (Additional); Local PrintHL4MPCAD.PRS&a\  P6G;\"\&P2gEKX X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd 2a=5,&a\  P6G;&P7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XP/Copy }nt????k ?? ???4 ?? 2  K` KT 3|a"i~'^ %>77n\%%%7>%7777777777%%>>>7gOIOOIDVV*7VIgOVDVO>IOOnOOI%%@7%7>0>0%7>%>\>7>>0*%>7O770,,9%9@%%%%%%%%%7%>O7O7O7O7O7nOO0I0I0I0I0))))O>V7V7V7V7O>O>O>O>O7O7O>U7V7O7O7C>O7O7O7O0O0O9O0OQI0I0I0I0V7V7V7V9V7V>V@**>*%*>Y>99V>II2I%I,IO>OO>O>V7V7mOO0O0O0>*>*>*>9I8I%I@O>O>O>O>O>O>nOO9I0I0I0O>I%O>>*I%O7P77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(:7%77777j7!%TT7!%QQ7T!%%777n&&Bn77nCTn(nBB(E\\>>n%77\n!"IIIITTenn7TnBA;7>lBBn7Times New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman ItalicCourierTimes New Roman Bold Italic"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNI\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\ S- I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#XP\  P6Q9XP##&a\  P6G;&P#2KK:g3"i~'^5>g\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\pBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\"i~'^ %,77\V%%%7>%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%%%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lCTn(nBB(A\\>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn7CaptionCaption for PleadingS BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ,"Washington, D.C. Triangle2vpBkka8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# 2v_ t Ia2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography :X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers :`S@ I.  X(# 2   _ a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersUj` `  @ a. ` (# 2"# y!I"a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers_o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p 22&T#T$$%%Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . 2!)d&''_(a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   2/S))3_*+a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:%}>&]?Footnotel#G!$?w A<x $}6 @  $}6 @ head1 #$'d#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf%$ a2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf&/` ` ` 2B'@(@)HA*Aa3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf':` ` `  a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf(E` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf)P  ` ` ` hhh a6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf*[   2E+B,C-d`D. Da7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf+f  a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf,q Bld/UnderlieBold and Underline Text-/  CitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output File.W r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  B2rH/F0F1>G2GIndentquoteeSingle space left & right indent/N X HeadingChapter Heading0J d  ) I. ׃  Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers1>a݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheading20\ E A.  2 K3dH4I5J6XJHIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldedd3+. DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date4 X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style off5@@    HEADERHeader A - Appearance62P71?K81pL91M:1NLETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.57 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.58f 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   LETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119L 3'3'Standard3'3'StandardZ K e6VE L"nU9   LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14: 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   2Q;n5P<XP=P>i|QTITLETitle of a Document;K\ * ăFOOTERFooter A - Appearanced<BLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indented=N X HEADING 33rd Heading Level>| X2IV?dR@j{RARBEUHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold Large?B*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored@ V -qLETTERHEADLetterhead - date/marginsAu H XX  3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"nE9    * 3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3' II"n"Tv3'StandarddZ K e VE L"nU9 Ѓ   INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math InvoiceB ,, $0$0  2[C-{VD8WE8XFZMEMORANDUMMemo Page FormatCD.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math InvoiceD:A ,p, $0$00INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math MacroEz 4p, $0$00INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math InvoiceF+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX 2T]GX[H[C\I[\J[\NORMALReturn to Normal TypestyleGSMALLSmall TypestyleHFINEFine TypestyleILARGELarge TypestyleJ2>`K[]L[]M<^N_EXTRA LARGEExtra Large TypestyleKVERY LARGEVery Large TypestyleLENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with HeaderM+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   footnote tex#N']#d6X@C@#2%bOep`Pl`QlAaRxafootnote referencefootnote referenceO Default Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph FontP Document 8Document 8Q Document 4Document 4R  2dSlWbTlbUl/cVlcDocument 6Document 6S Document 5Document 5T Document 2Document 2U Document 7Document 7V 2jW9dXWfYluhZhRight Par 1Right Par 1W` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 2Right Par 2X` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Document 3Document 3Y Right Par 3Right Par 3Z` hp x (#X` P hp x (#X` P hp x (#` hp x (#2s[1k\Om]mo^qRight Par 4Right Par 4[` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 5Right Par 5\` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 6Right Par 6]` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 7Right Par 7^` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2i|_s`(ua$!xb$EzRight Par 8Right Par 8_` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Document 1Document 1`` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 5Technical 5a` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 6Technical 6b` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2cl|dl}e$s}flTechnical 2Technical 2c Technical 3Technical 3d Technical 4Technical 4e` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 1Technical 1f 2g$5h$Yi}jTechnical 7Technical 7g` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 8Technical 8h` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#toc 1toc 1i` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#toc 2toc 2j` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#2ckl m'nEtoc 3toc 3k` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4l` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5m` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#toc 6toc 6n` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#2eovp q)rGtoc 7toc 7o toc 8toc 8p` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9q` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#index 1index 1r` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#2stulӜvr?index 2index 2s` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoat` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#_Equation Caption_Equation Captionu endnote referenceendnote referencev 2wpxqSyeĞze)13,6gDocument Style=(/D ,*/3Ew/0` ` ` 23-6gDocument Style=(/D -*/3Ex1 2 . 33.6gDocument Style=(/D .*/3Ey 34 43/6gDocument Style=(/D /*/3Ez 56 2{|pS}à~U5306gDocument Style=(/D 0*/3E{*78   6316gDocument Style=(/D 1*/3E|9:` ` ` 7326gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3E}8;<@   8336gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3E~A=>@` `  ` ` ` 2"[9346gDocument Style=(/D 4*/3E0? @    10356gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3EJAB` ` @  ` `  11366gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3ESCD` `  @  12376gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3E\EF` `  @hh# hhh 2wH13386gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3EeGH` `  hh#@( hh# 14396gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3EnIJ` `  hh#(@- ( 153:6gRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*/3EwKL` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 163;6gDocument Style=(/D ;*/3EFMN *  ׃  2o4>ک173<6gTechnical Document StyleD <*/3E&OP  . 183=6gTechnical Document StyleD =*/3E&QR  . 193>6gTechnical Document StyleD >*/3E*ST    203?6gTechnical Document StyleD ?*/3E'UV   25j213@6gTechnical Document StyleD @*/3E&WX   223A6gTechnical Document StyleD A*/3E4Y$Z     233B6gTechnical Document StyleD B*/3E&[\  . 243C6gTechnical Document StyleD C*/3E&]^  . 2P!έamFormat Downl6gFormat Downloaded DocumentD H*/3EUab XX    X\ #d6X@7@#referenceP6g` U/=(/D P*/3E;kl#FxX  P CXP#itemizeQ6gn U/=(/D Q*/3E*mn F r#FxX  PCXP#header2R6g| U/=(/D R*/3Eo p`    #FxX  PCXP# 2-pqeceȲDocument[8]'Eg%Document StyleE O  O g% W4I O g` ` ` Document[4]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g  . Document[6]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g  Document[5]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g  2_pbDocument[2]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g*    Document[7]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g  ` ` ` Right Par[1]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g8 @  Right Par[2]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gA@` ` `  ` ` ` 2]VDocument[3]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g0     Right Par[3]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gJ` ` ` @  ` ` ` Right Par[4]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gS` ` `  @  Right Par[5]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g\` ` `  @hhh hhh 2NRight Par[6]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O ge` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gn` ` `  hhh@  Right Par[8]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gw` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp Document[1]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gF    ׃  2ӻXݼyTechnical[5]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g&!"  . Technical[6]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g&#$  . Technical[2]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g*%&    Technical[3]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g''(   2@Ծ Technical[4]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g&)*   Technical[1]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g4+$,     Technical[7]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g&-.  . Technical[8]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g&/0  . 2}Format DownloadFormat Downloaded Documentiޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#Paragraph[1]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B$ab Paragraph[2]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B/cd` ` ` Paragraph[3]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B:ef` ` `  2KFParagraph[4]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )BEgh` ` `  Paragraph[5]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )BPij` ` ` hhh Paragraph[6]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B[kl Paragraph[7]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bfmn 27}~Paragraph[8]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bqop 25S&CMC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CG -2( -Ct )$ 26S&CNC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CU -2( -Ct )/` ` ` 27S&COC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cc -2( -Ct ):` ` `  2i28S&CPC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cq -2( -Ct )E` ` `  29S&CQC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )P` ` ` hhh 30S&CRC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )[ 31S&CSC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )f 2O32S&CTC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )q Default ParaC^fDefault Paragraph Font2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#_Equation CaC^f_Equation CaptionF2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#endnote refeC^fendnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>>#PP##PP#2#vv/vfootnote refC^ffootnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>#PP#heading 4heading 4 heading 5heading 5 heading 6heading 6 2%vMvv9vheading 7heading 7 heading 8heading 8 endnote textendnote text footnote textfootnote text 2WdulEtoa headingtoa heading` hp x (#(#(#` hp x (#A, B,|G?@6 Uppercase Letters=(*/|G?.E ._Equation Caption1_Equation Caption1 a12:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*O8mn@   2 Ha22:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OAop@` `  ` ` ` a32:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OJqr` ` @  ` `  a42:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OSst` `  @  a52:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*O\uv` `  @hh# hhh 2db5a62:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Oewx` `  hh#@( hh# a72:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Onyz` `  hh#(@- ( a82:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Ow{|` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp  2l5(S${SMALL s†NSMALL s†NORMAL¤ Technical 4¸žC ӆNORMAL¤ TNORMAL¤ Technical 4¸žC:\mw3022.tmp` hp x (#X` P hp x (#X` P hp x (#` hp x (#bly remains several bly remains several years \softline \softlheight276 awa` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (# Technical 4¸ Technical 4¸žC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmp` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#21lj[lT 2 Ҷ TechnicaT 2 Ҷ Technical 7Ҳ Right Par 7z INV` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#ОC:\mw3022.tmpC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\C :\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\COMP` hp x (#` hp x (## P7P# ރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOCރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: 2c~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: , ` hp x (# p x (# p x (#` hp x (#:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: , ` hp x (# p x (# p x (#` hp x (#: , : , ,0` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#е ,  , ,0` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#2 +lIZ:\mw3024.tmpt :\mw3024.tmpt C:\WINDOWS\MSAPPS\TEXTCONV\RTF_W` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#wwwwwbbbbbwwbwwbwwwwwbbbbbwwbwwbbbwwwwbwwwwbwwwwbwbwwwbwbb` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#,,0kjH 1, 2, 3,?@65NumbersO@/"=(1*1÷$t ?.E1.2Ana11I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')8ij@   a21I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Akl@` `  ` ` ` a31I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Jmn` ` @  ` `  a41I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Sop` `  @  2f.a51I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')\qr` `  @hh# hhh a61I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')est` `  hh#@( hh# a71I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')nuv` `  hh#(@- ( a81I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')wwx` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 21qWChapter?I@6HChapter Heading=(')8?I *')'0 ?I.E9y z ` CHAPTER 3  Report Body@6HMain Text of Report8?I *')'0 ?I.E{|  TitleNotesTitle Page NotesH('0\F H rW?I ''#Z*f9 x$X# #Z*f9 x%X#Works CitedWorks Cited PageH('0\F H rW?I 99         2:w "Page TitlePage Title PageH('0\F H rW?I #  `  Hanging indent   #Xx PXP#  X` hp x (#%'0*#Xx PXP#WPC3  2BJZ Courier3|xix6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Add) rm 804 L2HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\ ZX@2 6 ZF v3|xHP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Add) rm 804 L2HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\ ZX@a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` MACDocument4     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<     #:}D4P XP# T I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP##u\4 PXP#     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<     #:}D4P XP# ,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP##:}D4PXP#2Wl8xpara numnumbered indented paragraphs'Style 14Swiss 8 Pt Without Margins$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO Style 12Dutch Italics 11.5$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO Style 11Initial Codes for Advanced IIJ )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 ! )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   x )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   j-n )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  jBX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 2l|Style 3oDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/Tabs )a [ PfQO  ddn  # c0*b, oT9 !Style 4 PSwiss 8 Point with MarginsDq Co> PfQ  dddd  #  Style 1.5Dutch Roman 11.5 Font4h )a [ PfQO  dddn Style 2Dutch Italic 11.5$ )^ `> XifQ 2#k Style 5Dutch Bold 18 Point$RH$L T~> pfQ_  )a [ PfQO Style 7Swiss 11.5$$V )ao> PfQ ]  )a [ PfQO Style 6Dutch Roman 14 Point$$N w [ PfQ   )a [ PfQO Style 10oInitial Codes for Advanced U )a [ PfQK  dddn  ##  [[ b, oT9 !b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  QN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 2-K#K/&Kz(K*"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNM\\>>>\}0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>}}}\rryrr>Qygyrr\grrggF3FM\>\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QyQQFI3Ic>0cM>>>0>>>>>>\>\3r\r\r\r\r\yyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3y\\\\\\\\\gQr\\\\gQ\r\r\r\r\yQyQycyQnrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\\ccyQg3gBg>g;g3y\jy\y\\\yrFrFrF\F\F\FccgBg3gM\\\\\\ygcgFgFgF\g>y\\Fg>g\n0\\=(=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB_\F\\\\\\3;\7;\7>>gg\??n\\pBnnBb\\>g\7"yyyy\njc\}nn\2 KB-^/3"i~'^5Fg\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyyyyF\yrrygryyrr>3>g\>\\Q\Q>\g33\3g\\\FF3gQy\QF>(>g>0gg>>>0>>>>>>\>\3y\y\y\y\y\yQyQyQyQyQF3F3F3F3g\\\\ggggrQy\\\\rQ\r\y\y\y\yQyQygyQyQyQyQyQ\\\g\ggF3F\F>F\gggy\r3r_r>rFr3ggg\\yFyFyFgFgFgFggrcr3rgggggggyrgrFrFrF\r>ggFr>r\0\\=3=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB\\F\\\\\\07\7>\7>>\\\??n\\pBnnBigg>\\7"yyyy\nyc\gnn\(y.X80,X\  P6G;P)7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XP*2a=5,&a\  P6G;&P+2e=5,&e4  pG;&5P:% ,J:\  P6G;JP 6H5!,i,5\  P6G;,P\7{,W80,%0W*f9 xr G;X8y.\80,T\4  pG;\90_=5,%&_*f9 xr G;&X <r5ddd,<|d6X@`7@:P=% ,4IJ=4  pG;J;1a=5,Dt&a9 xOG;&<?xxx,<ix6X@`7X@ S- X    S-  Federal Communications Commission`g(#:FCC 98153 ă  yxdddy ՊPK #&a\  P6G;&P#Before the Federal Communications Commission  S-""Washington, D.C. 20554 ă  S`-In the Matter of hh,V) ` `  hh,V)  S-Carriage of the Transmissions hh,V)CS Docket No. 98120(#h  S-of Digital Television Broadcast StationsV) XX` ` X XXhh,XV)(#  S-Amendments to Part 76 hh,XV)(#  Sp-of the Commission's Ruleshh,V)  S -  NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING lU  S -X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:%,`(`(88"  S-  will return to the government 6 MHz of spectrum.L&$] yOh-  #X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14)(B) (Balanced Budget Act language concerning the reversion of the analog television  {O0-  spectrum to the Government). See also Fourth Report and Order in MM Docket 87268, 11 FCC Rcd 17771 (1996);  {O-  Fifth Report and Order in MM Docket 87268, 12 FCC Rcd 12809 (1997); Sixth Report and Order in MM Docket  yO-87268, 12 FCC Rcd 14588 (1997).L There are no federal digital cable transition   requirements. Cable operators are transitioning to digital on a voluntary basis and in some instances, cable  S-  .franchising agreements may require operators to upgrade their physical plant and offer digital services.'$] {O-  ԍDigital cable penetration is predicted to increase steadily within the next seven to ten years. See Price Colman,  {O-  <Digital Cable: When, Not If, BROADCASTING & CABLE, May 4, 1998 42, 46. (by 2001, for example, 52.8%   of TCI's basic subscribers will have access to digital cable. By that same year, 35.8% of Cablevision's basic subscribers will have access to digital cable.)   zThus, as the transition to digital occurs, a significant level of complexity will arise due to the different  S`-  time schedules followed by the nearly 1,600 television licenseesi(Z`] {O -  #X\  P6G;P#эThere are 1,579 full power television stations in the U.S. See Broadcast Station Totals As Of May 31, 1998,   FCC News Release, June 19, 1998. There could be up to 3,200 broadcast operations in the last few years of the transition period. i and the approximately 11,000 U.S. cable  S8-systems with respect to the implementation of digital transmissions.)8 ] {O-ԍWarren Publishing, Inc., Television & Cable Factbook, Services Volume No. 65, 1997, p. I81.  S-   10.` ` The rules governing the transition from analog to digital broadcasting are found in the  S-  [Fifth Report and Order.*, T ] {O-  ,#X\  P6G;P#эThe Fifth Report and Order also: (1) provides one 6 MHz channel for each DTV channel; (2) limits the initial   ieligibility for DTV licenses to existing full-power broadcasters; (3) requires DTV licensees to provide at least one   hfree digital programming service that is at least comparable in resolution to today's service and aired during the same   time periods that their analog channel is broadcasting; (4) allows licensees to provide ancillary or supplemental   services that do not derogate the mandated, free over-the-air program service; (5) gives broadcasters the discretion   as to how much, if any, high definition television programming they will transmit; (6) licenses DTV and NTSC   television facilities under a single, paired license; (7) states the Commission's intent to give special relief to   noncommercial broadcasters to assist in their transition to DTV, including providing them six years within which   Yto construct DTV facilities; (8) allows equipment manufacturers at this time to determine which video formats DTV   equipment will receive based on market and consumer demand; (9) postpones a decision whether to impose labeling   requirements on receiver manufacturers; and (10) declines to limit the sale of NTSC-only display devices in the  {ON-  hfuture. See Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Fifth Report and Order in MM Docket 87268, 13 FCC Rcd 6860 (1998).  This Order set forth a staggered implementation schedule for the introduction   of digital broadcast television. Construction requirements vary depending on the size of the television   market and other factors. In the first category, all stations in the top ten television markets that are  SJ -  yaffiliated with NBC, CBS, Fox, or ABC will have until May 1, 1999, to construct their digital facilities.c+J H] {O2#-ԍFifth Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 1284041.c   .In the second category, all stations in the top 30 television markets not included above that are affiliated  S -  \with NBC, CBS, Fox, or ABC will have until November 1, 1999, to construct their digital facilities.;, ] {Ot&-ԍId. at 12841.;   =In the third category, all other commercial stations will have until May 1, 2002, to construct their digital" l,,`(`(88 "  S-  broadcast television facilities.1-] {Oh-ԍId.1 All noncommercial stations will have until May 1, 2003, to construct their  S-  Ldigital broadcast television facilities.1.Z] {O-ԍId.1 We note that 24 television station licensees have expressed to the   Commission their intention to voluntarily expedite their schedules and complete construction and begin  S-broadcasting by November, 1998./h ] {O-  ԍThe licensees that volunteered to provide digital television service on November 1, 1998 as noted in the Fifth  {O-  .Report and Order, and their designated market areas, are as follows: (1) WCBSNew York; (2) KABCLos   ,Angeles; (3) KNBCLos Angeles; (4) KTLALos Angeles; (5) WMAQTVChicago; (6) WPVIPhiladelphia; (7)   KYWTVPhiladelphia; (8) WTXFPhiladelphia; (9) WCAUPhiladelphia; (10) KGOTVSan Francisco; (11)   KPIXTVSan Francisco; (12) KRONTVSan Francisco; (13) WCVBBoston; (14) WMURBoston, MA; (15)   WRCTVWashington, D.C.; (16) WJLATVWashington, D.C.; (17) WUSATVWashington, D.C.; (18) KDFW  DallasFt. Worth; (19) KXASTVDallasFt. Worth; (20) WFAATVDallasFt. Worth; (21) WJBKDetroit; (22)  {O -  iWWJTVDetroit; (23) WXIATVAtlanta; (24) and WSBAtlanta. See Fifth Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd  {OZ-  Y12810 at n. 164. Three other licensees, not noted in the Fifth Report and Order, also volunteered to build out their   digital facilities by November 1, 1998: (1) WNBCNew York; (2) WXYZTVDetroit; and (3) KHOUTV  Houston. WMAQTV and WWJ have indicated to the Commission that they will not be on the air by November 1, 1998 because of lease problems (for the former) and tower building problems (for the latter).  S8-   11.` ` Commencing April 1, 2003, digital broadcast television licensees and permittees must   lsimulcast at least 50% of the video programming transmitted on their analog channel; commencing   MApril1, 2004, there will be a 75% simulcasting requirement; commencing April 1, 2005, there will be  S-a 100% simulcasting requirement until the analog channel is terminated and returned to the Commission.`0] {O|-ԍFifth Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 12832.`     Sp-  o 12. ` ` Congress, in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 ("BBA"),w1p] yO-#X\  P6G;P#эPub. L. No. 10533, 11 Stat. 251 (1997).w codified certain exceptions to  SJ -  the return of spectrum by the 2006 target date established by the Commission.2^J >] {O(-  ԍWe recently stated that upon receipt of an appropriate petition, as specified in the Balanced Budget Act, the  {O-  Commission will examine the circumstances of individual licenses and grant extensions to any that qualify. See  {O-Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Fifth Report and Order 13 FCC Rcd at 6889.  That statute established   conditions under which the return may be extended beyond December 31, 2006, upon the request of a  S -  ltelevision station.h3 d] yO -#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14).h To retain its analog channel beyond that date, a television station will have to demonstrate that:  X(i) one or more of the stations in the relevant television market that are licensed to, or  affiliated with, one of the four largest national television networks, is not broadcasting a  digital television service signal, and the Commission finds that such station has exercised  due diligence and satisfies the conditions for an extension of the Commission's applicable  construction deadlines for digital television service in that market; (ii) digitaltoanalog" 3,`(`(88"  S- converter technology is not generally available in such market; or (iii) in any market in  awhich an extension is not available under clause (i) or (ii), 15 percent or more of the  television households in such market (I) do not subscribe to a multichannel video  programming distributor (as defined in section 602) that carries one of the digital  3television service programming channels of each of the television stations broadcasting  asuch a channel in such market; and (II) do not have either (a) at least one television  receiver capable of receiving the digital television service signals of the television stations  licensed in such market; or (b) at least one television receiver of analog television service  signals equipped with digitaltoanalog converter technology capable of receiving the digital television service signals of the television stations licensed in such market.    As the statutory language indicates, the return of the analog spectrum is in part dependent on the carriage   of digital television stations by cable operators and other multichannel video programming distributors   ("MVPDs"). In the BBA's legislative history, Congress stated that it was "not attempting to define the   scope of any MVPD's 'must carry' obligation for digital television signals" and that the digital broadcast  S -television must carry decision is "for the Commission to make at some point in the future."k4 ] yO-ԍH.R. Conf. Rep., 105th Cong., 1st Sess. No. 105217, at 577 (1997).k  S - ` `   SZ-  ~ 13. ` ` We read Section 614(b)(4)(B) of the 1992 Cable Act and Section 309(j) of the Balanced   Budget Act, along with their respective legislative histories, to give us broad authority to define the scope   ]of a cable operator's signal carriage requirements during the period of change from analog to digital  S-  jbroadcasting.15X] {O-ԍId.1 Given this intent, and noting the significant changes that are taking place in the broadcast   and cable television industries, as well as in the development of television reception devices, we tentatively   conclude that the Commission should have, and does have, the ability to develop rules to facilitate the   Mtransition process and to take into account the technical changes involved. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.  S-   14.` ` While we believe Congress has given the Commission discretion in exploring and deciding   the complex issues involved in this proceeding, we take as our starting point the general framework   governing the carriage of television stations currently found in Section 614, 615, and 325 of the Act.   .Section 614(b)(4)(B), and its legislative history, appears to support this approach as Congress intended   that the Commission establish technical standards for the carriage of digital television signals. Based on   the legislative history and the existing carriage provisions, we believe that the participation by the cable   industry during the transition period is likely to be essential to the successful introduction of digital broadcast television and the rapid return of the analog spectrum to the Commission.  S-  15. ` ` We also realize, given the history of the must carry provisions and the litigation relating   to them, that any rules adopted by the Commission must be carefully crafted to permit them to be   0sustained in the face of a constitutional challenge. Such rules must be consistent with the judicial   decisions regarding the constitutional limitations applicable in this area and in particular with the Supreme  S -  jCourt's holding in Turner Broadcasting System v. FCC ("Turner II").6 ] {Ot&-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#See Turner II, 117 S.Ct at 1190.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#Ѣ  As the Supreme Court has noted   in a previous decision reviewing the must carry provisions, "[w]hen the Government defends a regulation"! |6,`(`(88U#"   on speech as a means to redress past harms or prevent anticipated harms, it must do more than simply  S-  `posit the existence of the disease sought to be cured.' . . . The government must demonstrate that the   recited harms are real, not merely conjectural, and that the regulation will in fact alleviate these harms in  S-  a direct and material way."7] {O-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#Turner v. FCC , 512 U.S. at 664 ("Turner I") (internal citation omitted). #Xj\  P6G;9XP# In Turner II, the Supreme Court found the must carry provisions of the 1992  Sb-  -Cable Act to be content neutral regulations subject to intermediate First Amendment scrutiny.8bZ] {O\-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#Turner II, 117 S.Ct at 1186.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#ј The Court   Kemphasized that preserving the benefits of free, overtheair broadcast television, promoting the widespread   dissemination of information from a multiplicity of sources, and promoting fair competition in the market  S-  kfor television programming, were important governmental interests.X9] {Ov -#X\  P6G;P#эId.X The court noted that there was   substantial evidence before Congress supporting the predictive judgment that local broadcasters denied   mcarriage "would suffer financial harm and possible ruin" in the absence of carriage rules and the   Government's assertion that "the economic health of local broadcasting is in genuine jeopardy and in need   of the protections afforded by must-carry" was found to be reasonable and supported by the evidence.   ?In addressing the question of whether the requirements "burden substantially more speech that is   necessary" to further the governmental interest involved, the Court indicated that "the actual effects are   modest" and that "[s]ignificant evidence indicates the vast majority of cable operators have not been  S -  affected in a significant manner by mustcarry.": ~] {O-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#Id. at 1198.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#ш The Court concluded that the requirements were not   1invalid based on a challenge that they are "substantially broader than necessary to achieve the  SZ-  government's interest.;Z] {O -ԍ#X\  P6G;P#Id. at 1200.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#ш Noting that Turner II did not address the mandatory carriage of the broadcaster's   digital television signal, we ask how the Court's reasoning and conclusions would apply in the context of this proceeding.  S-  16. ` ` Given this background, we find it essential to build a record relating to the interests to be   =served by any digital broadcast signal carriage rules, the factual predicate on which they would be based,   the harms to be prevented, and the burdens they would impose. Having an updated record is particularly   important because of the many legal and technical developments that have taken place since the analog   must carry provisions were enacted in 1992, and to take into account the differences brought about by the   conversion to digital broadcasting and the parallel conversion to digital cable operations. For example,   Ltelevision reception via antennas has been made easier and more convenient than was the case earlier this   decade. Legal barriers to overtheair reception of broadcast signals, caused by restrictions on antenna   placement, have been reduced because of the over the air reception device preemption provisions of the  ST-  -Telecommunications Act of 1996.n<T] {O#-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#See 47 U.S.C 303 nt. n  Input selector ("A/B") switches, which allow the subscriber to switch   >between cable and an antenna, may now be built into television receivers and can be easily controlled  S-  from a TV remote control device.L=4 ] {O&-ԍSee paras. 8788, infra.L Some of the reception problems that made it difficult for certain" =,`(`(88z"   consumers to receive overtheair broadcast signals may be eliminated by the conversion to digital.   Broadcasting may not be the only source of local programming as cable operators have developed local   jnews channels and public, educational, and governmental access channels, which provide highly localized   [content, have multiplied in the past six years. We seek to develop through this proceeding, the facts and data necessary for a complete record and ask for the assistance of all parties in developing that record.  S-` `   III. DIGITAL COMPATIBILITY ă  S-  o17. ` ` In this section, we address the compatibility issues recognizing that the introduction of   /DTV, and any carriage rules we may implement, will be most successful if all the components of the   jtransmission path work together. Furthermore, an understanding how the different technical elements fit   together is essential to a discussion of the core digital broadcast signal carriage issues. Here, we explain   how digital transmission systems function and the means of transporting the DTV signal through the cable   system to the subscriber. This discussion is particularly important in understanding the cable system   ychannel capacity, channel position, and technical standards issues that are addressed at length throughout   \the document. Possible technical impediments preventing the reception of the DTV signal are raised,  S -including matters that are integral to the discussion of material degradation in Section IV of the text.  SX-   S0-  18. ` ` Cable carriage of television broadcast signals in the existing analog environment involves   the need to coordinate multiple technical systems a television broadcast station transmission, a cable   television distribution system, and a television receiver. All three are standardized by regulation or custom   yto transmit, distribute, and display analog NTSC television pictures. Although issues sometimes arise as  S-  to how these parts fit together from a technical perspective, >$] yO-  ԍThe All Channel Receiver Act and cable television equipment compatibility regulations are examples of issues  {O-  that have been addressed through legislation or regulation. Thus, for example, the Commission, in its First Report  {O-  and Order in ET Docket 937, 9 FCC Rcd 1981 (1994) adopted rules controlling both cable transmission and the functioning of analog television receivers labeled as "Cable Ready."  the basic elements are relatively standard   =and well known. In the new digital environment, however, neither law nor regulation standardizes every   element. How the multiple technical systems will function in a digital environment remains to be seen.   We note that the various technical elements involved in digital broadcast signal carriage are constantly in   Mflux as technology advances. We set forth our basic current understanding of the applicable technical  S-context and seek comment and updated information relating to this review.  S-  Sx-A.Digital Transmission Systems  S(-  19.` ` The digital television transmission system and related standards were established by the  S-  Advanced Television Systems Committee ("ATSC").{? ] yOT!-  ԍThe ATSC is an industry organization that represents all aspects of the video industry, including broadcasters, cable operators, and equipment manufacturers.   The ATSC standards are generally discussed as including 18 scanning formats, although there are more technically  {Ot$-  h36. The 18 formats are described in the Commission's Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket   No. 87268, 11 FCC Rcd 6235, 6239 and in Annex A, Table 3 of the "ATSC Digital Television Standard" Doc.   A/53. These specific formats were not incorporated into the Commission's digital television broadcast standards.  {O&-  See Fourth Report and Order in MM Docket No. 87268, 11 FCC Rcd 17771, 17790. There are six video formats   which are "high definition television": 1080line by 1920pixel formats at all picture rates (24, 30 and 60 pictures"'>,`(`('"   per second) and the 720line by 1280pixel formats at these same picture rates. All these formats have a 16:9 aspect   ratio. The remaining twelve video formats, while representing some significant improvements over analog NTSC,   are not high definition television. They are referred to as "standard definition television." These are the 480line by   704pixel formats in 16:9 widescreen and 4:3 aspect ratios, at the picture rates listed above, and the 480line by 640pixel format at a 4:3 aspect ration. { The components, or comprising layers, are the" x?,`(`(88/"   video/audio layer, compression layer, transport layer, and the transmission layer. At the top of the ATSC   hierarchy is the uncompressed digital signal in one of the various video/audio formats. Under the ATSC's   highly flexible standard, it is possible to transmit high definition pictures and high quality sound, multiple   >standard definition pictures, and other ancillary related or unrelated communications, with the mix of  S`-  kservices changing dynamically from second to second.@x`x] yOx -  ԍThe nature of digital transmission is that it consists of a stream of bits that can be video, data, or any other type   of information. Because digital television uses data packets with headers and descriptors identifying their content,   different types of information can be intermixed within the same transmission stream. The amount of data necessary   to transmit a digital television picture may also vary with the type of pictures being transmitted. A picture with little  yO -  motion can be provided using only a fraction of the capacity required by full motion video. Programming recorded   ion film at a standard 24 frames per second and converted in advance for digital distribution, may also require less capacity than a live video production. The video content may be transmitted in the  S8-  zprogressive scan or in the interlaced transmission format.A 8 ] yO-  ԍProgressive scan is a method of painting pictures on computer monitors or television screens in which the   wpicture is painted sequentially line by line. In the interlaced scanning method, on the other hand, a complete picture   is transmitted in two half pictures, in which the first half picture comprises odd numbered lines and the second half picture comprises the even numbered lines. Pictures may be transmitted in a standard   definition format, such as 480 progressive, or in a high definition format, such as 720 progressive or 1080 interlaced. The bitstream that corresponds with the video/audio layer is known as the elementary stream.  S-  $20. ` ` At the next level down in the hierarchy is the compression layer. The purpose of this   jlayer is to take the elementary stream from the layer above and compress it into a bitstream with a lower   data rate. In the ATSC standard, MPEG2 compression is used for the video and the Dolby AC3   compression is used for the audio. The amount of compression depends upon the compression format chosen. Additional compression lowers the data rate, but at the possible loss of some video/audio quality.  S -  21. ` ` The compressed bitstream, in turn, may be packetized and multiplexed with other   zbitstreams into a higher data rate digital bitstream. This is done in what is referred to as the transport   layer. This multiplexed bitstream may include multiple programs and/or multiple data signals. The ATSC standard uses the MPEG2 transport protocol for this purpose.   S-  R22. ` ` The lowest layer in the hierarchy is referred to as the transmission layer. Here, the   multiplexed bitstream from the transport layer is modulated onto a radio frequency ("RF") carrier. The  S-  ATSC set forth standards for two modulation modes using vestigial sideband modulation ("VSB")B] yO#-  KԍVSB is a form of amplitude modulation in which one sideband of the main modulated signal and a small part of the other sideband of the same signal are transmitted. The current analog television standard also uses VSB.: a   kterrestrial broadcast mode (8 VSB) and a high data rate mode (16 VSB), which is said to be capable of   reliably delivering approximately twice the data throughput in a 6 MHz cable television channel as the"@ B,`(`(88E"  S-  ]8 VSB mode (38 Mbps as compared to 19 Mbps).C ] {Oh-ЍATSC Digital Television Standard, Doc. A/53, at Annex D, 5.1; See also 1996 NCTA Technical Paper at 48, "The Advanced Television System Will It Work On Your System?", Brian James, CableTV Labs, Inc. The Commission has described the reason for the different standards as follows: XTerrestrial broadcasts of DTV will be exposed to situations that include strong interfering signals, electromagnetic noise from numerous sources, and configurations of buildings or terrain features that cause multipath interference. For successful reception under these difficult conditions, an 8 level VSB signal is specified and extensive error correction is provided. Taking into account the transport requirements and error correction, the 8-VSB signal carries an effective useful payload of approximately 19.28 megabits per second (Mbps). For more benign environments, like that provided in a cable system, the ATSC DTV Standard includes a 16-level VSB high data rate mode that provides double the capacity of the 8-level VSB terrestrial broadcast mode.   {OZ -Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket 87268, 11 FCC Rcd at 624142. The 8 VSB standard has been optimized for  S-  terrestrial broadcast television delivery where transmission errors and data loss are likely.@DL ] {O-ԍId. at 6241.@ The  S-  Commission has adopted VSB as part of the digital broadcast standard.E] {O.-  ;ԍWe adopted a modification of the ATSC DTV standard in 1996. See Fourth Report and Order in MM Docket   No. 87268, 11 FCC Rcd at 17772. This modification is consistent with a consensus agreement voluntarily developed   by a broad crosssection of parties, including the broadcasting, consumer equipment manufacturing, and computer   industries. The standard we adopted differs from the ATSC DTV standard in that it does not include the ATSC specifications with respect to scanning formats, aspect ratios, and lines of resolution. The Commission, however, has   /not adopted a digital cable standard nor has the industry embraced the use of 16 VSB. Instead, cable   operators plan to transmit digital communications, from the headend to the subscriber, using quadrature  S8-  [amplitude modulation ("QAM"),F8] yOh-#X\  P6G;P#эQAM is a complex modulation technique, using variations in both signal phase and amplitude. either 64 QAM or 256 QAM (which is closer to 16 VSB in terms of  S-  its data rate).G ] yO-  JԍIn terms of data rate, the 256 QAM corresponds roughly with the 16 VSB service (38 Mpbs data rate) discussed by the ATSC, while 64 QAM has a 27 Mbps data rate. Both 64 and 256 QAM likely will provide cable operators with a greater degree of   operating efficiency than does 8 VSB, and permits the carriage of a higher data rate, with less bits devoted to error correction, when compared with the digital broadcast system.  Sp-  ~23. ` ` The above description of the four layer hierarchy is based upon a sequence of events at   the transmitting end of a digital television system. That is, it started with the elementary digital stream   ywhich is compressed in the compression layer, multiplexed in the transport layer and modulated onto an   =RF carrier in the transmission layer. The signal progresses from layertolayer down the protocol stack. At the receiving end, the process is reversed. ` `  S -  24. ` ` While the conversion of television stations to a digital transmission mode is generally   associated with greatly improved sound and picture quality in the high definition mode and with better   and more flexible reception in the standard definition mode, the practical definition of "digital" in the   kcable context may vary from system to system. The fact that a portion of a cable system capacity is"xG,`(`(88"   digital may mean only that more channels are offered with no fundamental enhancements in sound and  S-  picture quality. For example, a cable system making use of TCI's Headend in the Sky or "HITS,"H] yO@-  ZԍHITS is a satellitedelivered digital programming and packaging service offered to cable operators who want to offer more channels to their subscribers but do not have the capacity to add those channels to their analog tiers. would   Lbe distributing various packages of digitally compressed satellitebased programming to subscribers with   an associated set top box. Current HITS technology allows for at least twelve digitally compressed  S`-  channels to fit onto one analog cable channel.oIx` ] yO -  .ԍA process called statistical multiplexing may be used when a large number of signals are compressed and   transmitted together. Because picture motion on different channels does not change at a constant rate, on a statistical   Kbasis one channel is likely to have excess capacity when another is over capacity. Thus the sharing of resources   ,between channels increases overall capacity. This process, however, adds considerable additional complexity to the   ;compression process and may make it difficult to include within the statistically multiplexed data stream content of   a type unknown in advance, such as might be provided by a local broadcast station, and which for which additional integration equipment would be needed. o The programming content is compressed and bundled into   .discrete groups of programming services at TCI's satellite uplink so that it can be passed through by the   system operator essentially without additional processing. However, there are cable operators that will   /be offering digital cable using QAM on an upgraded cable system. For example, in the case of a 750   MHz system, the 54 MHz to 550 MHz region of the cable system may be reserved for analog signals,  S-  while the 550 to 750 MHz area will carry dozens of digital signals.J` ] {O-ԍSee Leslie Ellis, QAM Quickens, MULTICHANNEL NEWS, March 16, 1998 supplement at 15A. A critical distinction between the   {two is that systems subscribing to HITS may not necessarily have excess capacity to carry digital television stations while a 750 MHz QAM system may, in fact, have such capacity.  S - B.Digital Set Top Boxes  S -  `25.` ` A critical aspect of the digital television transmission path involves the digital cable set  S -  top boxes.K ] yO-  ԍThe issues involved in how the set top box will function in a digital communications environment are now   [being closely examined by the cable industry through its "OpenCable" initiative, which is operating under the   auspices of CableLabs, the industry's research and development group. The OpenCable process is intended to foster   Zcompetition among vendors for key elements of digital cable networks while ensuring interoperability of devices   connected to cable networks. The OpenCable process was initiated by CableLabs in August 1997 through a Request   for Information seeking input from the consumer electronics and computer hardware and software industries on   recommended approaches to next generation settop boxes. Cable industry discussion facilitated by CableLabs,   together with responses from the vendor community, has allowed the cable industry to establish a consensus on the   majority of key interfaces and features. These elements, announced in November 1997, include: (1) enabling   multiple operating system software choices; (2) using established internet standards, such as HTML and JavaScript;   (3) implementing the industry Harmony Agreement to preserve essential security needs and enable new equipment   suppliers; (4) using the established MPEG2 digital video standard; and (5) incorporating the DOCSIS (data over  {Or#-  cable system interface specification) cable modem standard. See CableLab's website at http://www.cablelabs.com/PR/opencb1197_rel.html. Significant issues arise as to how set top boxes will interact with the distribution of both  SX-  digital cable and digital broadcast signals.LX] yO&-  hԍA further discussion of how the cable operator may alter the digital broadcast television signal is found at paras.  {Ol'-6268, infra. Digital cable set top boxes perform digital signal processing,"XL,`(`(88-"   decompression, and demultiplexing functions. The receiving device demodulates the carrier, i.e., it extracts   the multiplexed bitstream from the carrier, in the transmission layer. The multiplexed bitstream is passed   up to the transport layer where it is demultiplexed into its component bitstreams. The individual streams   zare, in turn, passed up to the compression layer where they are decompressed and passed up into the   video/audio layer for decoding and display. The set top box also controls access to prevent theft of the   zservice and makes compressed digital cable services available for reception on analog NTSC television   yreceivers. In an entirely digital environment, the set top box and the digital receiver may work in tandem   Lby trading off the digital processing function. For example, a set top box that lacks sufficient processing   power and memory to uncompress a high definition signal could nevertheless deliver the compressed data   stream to the receiver where it would be uncompressed. A variety of concerns have been raised regarding   jthe set top box's ability to "pass through" the signals of digital broadcast stations, including in particular,  SH -  high definition signals.M"H ] yO -  ԍTCI recognizes that while the digital set top box will pass through any high definition format directly to a   Jdigital receiver, in the absence of such a receiver, and without any translation to an NTSC format, the display would  {O@ -  "likely show white snow." See Letter to Comm. Susan Ness from Telecommunications Inc. President Leo J. Hindery, February 11, 1998. The concern stems from three separate, but related, developments: (1) the   possibility of shared functions between set top boxes and receivers; (2) the possible lack of processing   -power and memory in some set top boxes; and (3) the possibility of broadcast signals being passed directly through to receivers without any processing by the set top box.   S -  _26.` ` "Pass through," in one scenario, means that the signals in the VSB format would be passed   through the set top box, without being processed, and sent directly into the receiver for display. If the   signal was sent through the system in the proper format and the receiver was capable of displaying that   signal, the set top box would create no obstacle since it was bypassed in the distribution chain. Under   another scenario, the set top box would play a partial processing function by detecting, demodulating and   demultiplexing the signal, but leave it compressed. The signal would then be passed to the receiver which   would uncompress it. The reasons a box might be designed to function in this fashion is that extra   ymemory and processing power are required to uncompress certain of the high definition formats and thus   a less expensive box could be designed if the circuitry in the television receiver could be shared and used to address the compression issue.  S-  P27.` ` Another scenario is where the set top box converts the digital signal for display on NTSC   ztelevision receivers. Conversion will allow cable subscribers to view digital television on their current   analog television receivers. However, to process high definition video programs, the set top box would   need sufficient memory and computing power, which would add to the cost of the equipment. Regardless   of which techniques are used, electronic program guides and other interactive set top features may not  S-  ywork with signals that are not processed by the set top box.N"] {OR!-  ԍTCI has recognized this possibility. See Letter to Members of Congress from Telecommunications, Inc.   Chairman and CEO John Malone, May 11, 1998 ("With 1080i, the customer, when tuned to a high definition   channel, would lose all the surfing features we are able to provide unless he or she has the much more expensive allformat settop.") We seek comment updating and informing   0us on the current state of set top box technology as it relates to the carriage, pass through, and/or conversion of digital broadcast signals. "N,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  28. ` ` It has been suggested that some of the digital broadcastset top box processing issues could  S-  Lbe addressed through the use of a digital bus,O] yO@-  ԍA bus is a circuit or group of circuits that provide an electronic pathway between two or more central processing units or input/output devices. exemplified by a standard interface known as IEEE1394.   This interface could allow a digital settop box to share some of the resources of other devices in terms   Lof the processing of digital signals, such as the MPEG decoder in a digital television receiver. Thus, high   definition signals can be processed and displayed on the digital television receiver through the bus even   though the digital set top box could not perform the processing function. This interface is also important   in the context of digital broadcast signal carriage because it may be needed to ensure that onscreen   Lgraphics and program guide capabilities are enabled for the digital broadcast signals that are being carried.   We seek comment on whether a bus standard could in fact address some of the set top box interface   issues raised above. We are aware that the relevant industries are developing an interface standard and  Sp-  we fully expect that they will move quickly to adopt this standard.bPZp ] yO0 -  ԍWe note that OpenCable has recently distributed a 30 page draft 1394 specification to consumer electronics  {O -  manufacturers and retailers. See Leslie Ellis, ConsumerElectronics Outfits Huddle in Opencable Meetings, MULTICHANNEL NEWS, July 6, 1998 at 71.b Given this, we thus far have   concluded that the goal of an effective interface can be met without regulatory action. Nonetheless,   =because of the importance of this issue and because of recent reports that the development of a standard   may not be proceeding as expeditiously as previously thought, we ask if the Commission should consider   rules, or other appropriate action, e.g., establishment of a deadline, to ensure that both the set top box and   the digital receiver are 1394compatible. If not, are there other devices or attachments on the market or   being developed that would provide a simplified or more desirable interconnection between the set top and the digital receiver?  S-  P29.` ` It is difficult as this point in time to determine the technical abilities of the different digital   set top boxes already distributed and in production, and how different cable operators will engage set top   boxes in their business plans. At least one major system operator, TCI, has indicated that the set top   boxes it will employ will ultimately be capable of passing through digital broadcast transmissions to the  Sh-  jcable subscriber.QZhB] {OJ-  ԍSee, e.g., Letter to Comm. Susan Ness from Telecommunications Inc. President Leo J. Hindery, January 26,   1998 ("TCI's advanced digital settop devices will indeed have the capability of passing through HDTV signals in any of the dozens of HDTV formats currently being discussedincluding the 1080I format.")  This may involve simply providing a direct connection through the digital set top box  S@-  to the digital television receiver.R@d ] yOD-  ԍTCI has not made clear, however, if its set top boxes will be able to convert high definition signals into an  {O -  YNTSC analog format. See id. (The cable operator specifically states that "[R]ecognizing the limited number of high   ;definition television sets that will initially be in consumers' homes, TCI has taken the extra step of ensuring that its   advanced digital settop devices will be able to immediately translate the 480P HDTV format into standard NTSC signals for display on standard definition television sets.") Although we do not want to impose unnecessary requirements, we seek   comment on whether a mandate that set top boxes be designed to process all types of digital broadcast   television formats is needed, and if so, what additional cost (to cable operators and at retail to consumers)   ywould be involved. What effect would such a requirement have on the commercial availability of set top"R,`(`(88"  S-  boxes?_SZ] yOh-  ԍQuestions concerning the retail sale of set top boxes were recently addressed in the Commission's navigation  {O0-  device order. See Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices, Report and Order in CS Docket No. 9780, FCC 98116, (rel. June 24, 1998)._ Would the remote control units used with the digital set top box also work with all digital receivers?  S-  #30. ` ` Digital cable set top boxes may also perform certain other operations that may need to be   considered, such as functions that are intended to assist program suppliers providing "copy protection" to   ztheir programming. The copy protection concern is that parties having access to the basic content of   digital programming can make copies that are virtually as good as the original thus creating commercial   [incentives to withhold or delay the distribution of certain programming product. In February, 1998, five  S-  members of the ad hoc Copy Protection Technical Working GroupT] yOJ -  ԍThe companies include Hitachi, Intel, Matshushita Electric Corp. of America, Sony Electronics Corp. and  {O -Toshiba. See Encryption Deal Threatens Taping, MULTICHANNEL NEWS, Feb. 23, 1998 at 2, 77.  presented a proposal aimed at   protecting digital video and audio content riding on and between personal computers, digital receivers, set Sp-  ztops, digital video cassette recorders and digital video disk players. Work is continuing on this effort.   In this instance, we ask whether copy protection is a matter that the Commission should explore in further detail in this proceeding, in terms of the general issue of equipment compatibility.  S - C.Digital Receivers   S -  C31.` ` Receiver manufacturers are in the process of designing digital television sets. Their   features are not standardized and the Commission has, to date, specifically declined to adopt digital  S0-  Ltelevision receiver standards.kU0D] {O-ԍFifth Report and Order in Docket 87268, 12 FCC at 1285556. k Moreover, the ATSC DTV standard does not specify requirements for a   compliant receiver. In essence, DTV receiver designs are to be based on the specifications of the signal   contained in the other portions of the standard. It appears, however, that all digital television receivers   zwill be built to receive VSB transmissions and to process all 18 ATSC formats. Whether they will be   capable of receiving QAM transmissions, and be built with a standard interface such as IEEE 1394, is less   kcertain. Regardless of how the digital television set is configured, it appears likely that there will be a   considerable market for digital converter boxes that mediate between analog television receivers and digital   transmission systems to lower the cost of digital reception. In this area, we seek comment on whether   television receivers will be digital cable (QAM)ready, or 1394 ready, and when such sets would be   available to the public. Should the Commission take action to encourage the production of cableready  S-  receivers to facilitate the introduction of digital broadcast television?VZ] yO!-  ԍThe Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association ("CEMA") recently identified what it believes are the   key elements that all cableready digital television receivers should have. According to this group, cableready   receivers and cable operators should: (1) Support ATSC Digital Television Standard A/53; (2) Follow RF   Jperformance recommendations per draft EIA23, which defines tuner and corresponding cable signal characteristics;   <(3) Tune cable channels per EIA542, which lists the frequencies to be used for each cable channel; (4) Use only   64/256 QAM modulation as specified in SCTE standard DVS031 or 8 VSB and possibly 16 VSB modulation, as   defined in ATSC A/53; (5) Support draft standard SCTE DVS093, which defines the MPEG2 packetization of   program material; (6) Use only the transmission video display formats defined in ATSC standard A/53 table 3 and   in table 2 of SCTE standard DVS033; (7) Use the inband Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial"V'U,`(`('"   Broadcast and Cable, SCTE standard DVS097, which defines the data format for tuning parameters, vchip  {OX-  information and onscreen program guides; and (8) Support emergency messaging. See CEMA News Release, May 8, 1998. We also seek comment on whether"V,`(`(88"   ythe matters at issue in this proceeding suggest the need for an industry receiver standard. Is this the right  S-proceeding to address these matters?W] yOb-  ԍWe note that we could address these issues in our ongoing discussion of consumer electronics compatibility in ET Docket 937.  S-  IV. CARRIAGE AND RETRANSMISSION CONSENT ISSUES ă  S8- A. Retransmission Consent  S-  o32. ` ` Section 325 contains the Act's retransmission consent provisions.@XB] yO -ԍ47 U.S.C. 325(b)(1).@ The law governing   zretransmission consent generally prohibits cable operators and other multichannel video programming   distributors from retransmitting the signal of a commercial television station, radio station or low power   =station without the prior consent of the station whose signal is being transmitted, unless the broadcaster  SH -  =has chosen must carry.1YH ] {O-ԍId.1 Every three years, commercial television stations must elect between pursuing  S -  their mandatory carriage rights or their retransmission consent rights.CZ d ] yO$-ԍ47 U.S.C. 325(b)(3)(B).C Noncommercial television stations  S -do not have retransmission consent rights.C[ ] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 325(b)(2)(A).C  S -  P 33.` ` It has been estimated that approximately 80 percent of commercial television broadcasters   /elected retransmission consent on some cable systems, rather than must carry, during the 19931996  SX-  election cycle.\"X ] {O|-  #X\  P6G;P#эSee Charles Lubinsky, Reconsidering Retransmission Consent, 49 FEDERAL COMM. L.J. 99, 146 (1996)   ("When the dust had finally settled [in 1993], 80 percent of all commercial TV stations chose retransmission consent   over must carry. Ninety percent of network TV affiliates chose retransmission consent, although only 20 percent of independent stations chose this route"). Thus, assuming this information is accurate, the question arises as to whether the general   .pattern will be repeated with respect to digital broadcast television stations during the transition period.   There are reasons to believe it might not be because few cable subscribers will have digital receivers, at   least initially. If it is repeated, however, it is possible that many of the transitional issues involved in this   proceeding will be resolved through retransmission consent negotiations. Also, if the general   Lretransmission consent pattern is repeated, the digital television stations scheduled to begin broadcasting   in November 1998, May 1999, and November 1999, are most likely to exercise retransmission consent   for the third election cycle currently scheduled to commence on January 1, 2000, even if there were digital   kmust carry requirements in place. Television stations not affiliated with the four major networks and   .commercial television stations in smaller markets are those broadcasters most likely to exercise the must   carry option, but a number of these stations will not commence digital operations until the year 2002,"n\,`(`(88"   when they are required to do so under the Commission's rules. We seek comment on these general   zestimates and what effect these market factors would have on the need to implement must carry rules   immediately. Moreover, what effect would not setting rules have on television stations, not affiliated with   the top four networks, that want to build out earlier than 2002? We also seek comment on how   retransmission consent, rather than must carry, will speed the transition to digital television. For example,   [a cable operator could agree to carry a broadcaster's ancillary and supplementary digital services, that are   {not subject to a must carry requirement, and the carriage of such services could spur consumers to purchase digital receivers.  S-  !34.` ` The advent of digital broadcast television raises certain potential retransmission consent   procedural issues that need to be addressed. The Broadcasters had previously commented that the   Lretransmission consent process should apply separately to the analog and digital broadcast signal. They   argue that separate must carry/retransmission consent elections should be allowed for each transmission  S -  mode.]X ] yO` -  ԍBroadcaster Comments at 33. This suggestion implicitly recognizes that there are two television stations at   issue. If so, then it presupposes that, although the analog signal and digital transmission are licensed to one entity,  yO-there are two stations for the purposes of a signal duplication analysis. ę In this context, we first seek comment on whether analog and digital broadcasts constitute   separate "broadcasting stations" for purposes of retransmission consent and digital broadcast signal   carriage. Would the Broadcaster's approach be desirable because it permits the separation of two possibly   unrelated issues? Conversely, we ask whether the Broadcasters' proposal would unbalance the negotiation process by divorcing decisions made by a single licensee during the transition to digital television.   S-  #"35.` ` We further inquire as to whether a common retransmission/must carry election is required   mfor the broadcaster's entire transmission or may the broadcaster select which of its channels or   programming streams is deemed a must carry program stream and which is a retransmission consent   program stream. We note that the Commission has stated in the analog context that "any broadcast station   /that is eligible for mustcarry status, although it may be carried pursuant to a retransmission consent   agreement must . . . be carried in the entirety, unless carriage of specific programming is prohibited ...  S-  pursuant to our rules."^] {O-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.62(a); see also Must Carry Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 6745. Nonetheless, it may be desirable to allow partial carriage pursuant to the   |retransmission consent process if that is what the parties agree to. We seek comment on what   countervailing policy would suggest a requirement for all of a station's digital broadcast output and whether changes in the policy described above are warranted.  SP-  #36. ` ` As stated previously, the Act requires local commercial television stations to elect either  S(-  must carry or retransmission consent on a triennial basis._(z] {OB!-#X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 U.S.C. 325(b)(3)(B); 47 C.F.R. 76.64(f)(2). The first election cycle ended on   December31, 1996, and the second election cycle ends on December 31, 1999. Assuming that there   was some form of mandatory digital broadcast signal carriage rules in place during the transition period,   we ask whether the current must carry/retransmission consent cycle should be shortened or otherwise  S-  changed to further accommodate the introduction of digital broadcast television? Are changes in the   election cycle permitted under the Act? We note that new television stations can make their initial   election anytime between 60 days prior to commencing broadcast and 30 days after commencing broadcast"8 _,`(`(88 "  S-  jwith the initial election taking effect 90 days after they are made.B`] yOh-ԍ47 C.F.R. 76.64(f)(4).B Instead of revising the election cycle,   should we instead apply the current "new station" rule to digital broadcast television signals when they   =sign ontheair? Alternatively, if there were no mandatory digital broadcast signal carriage rules in place,   .we seek comment on the procedural mechanisms necessary for digital television stations to enforce their retransmission consent rights against cable operators.  S-  _$37. ` ` Section 325(b)(2)(D) exempts cable operators from the obligation to obtain retransmission  S-  zconsent from superstationsaX] yO -  ԍA superstation is a television broadcast station other than a network station, licensed by the Commission that is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier. 47 C.F.R. 76.64(c)(2). whose signals were available by a satellite or common carrier on May 1,  S-  1991.gb] yO -#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 325(b)(1).g The legislative history behind this provision states that an exemption from retransmission consent   <was necessary "to avoid sudden disruption to established relationships" between superstations and satellite  Sp-  carriers.cp@] yOP-#X\  P6G;P#эS. Rep. No. 92, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. at 27 (1992). United Video, in comments filed in response to the Fourth Further Notice, explains that the   exemption permits it to continue to uplink superstations signals and transmit them to cable operators and  S" -  other facilitiesbased multichannel video providers.jd" ] yO-#X\  P6G;P#эUnited Video Comments at 5.j We seek comment on whether the digital   yreplacement stations for these analog superstations should be treated as new stations for purposes of the retransmission consent provisions or whether they should have the same status as the ones they replace.  S -  %38. ` ` In the Must Carry Report and Order, we specifically prohibited exclusive retransmission  S\-  consent agreements between television broadcast stations and cable operators.}eZ\` ] {O\-  ԍMust Carry Order at 3006. Section 76.64(m) of the Commission's rules provides that "exclusive   retransmission consent agreements are prohibited. No television broadcast station shall make an agreement with one multichannel distributor for carriage, to the exclusion of other multichannel distributors."} This policy forbids a   \television station from making an agreement with one MVPD for carriage exclusive of other MVPDs.   The Commission, however, indicated that while this restriction was desirable at least initially, it would  S-  reconsider the need for such a prohibition.f ] {O-  JԍThis policy position was stated in 1994, as part of the Commission's reconsideration of the Must Carry Order.  {O- Must Carry Recon. at 6746. We now seek comment on the continuing desirability of this   zprohibition. We ask what impact the introduction of digital television has on this policy and how the  S-Commission's decision in this regard would hasten or slow down the transition period. X  SD-B. Must Carry During The Transition Period   S-  o&39. ` ` We recognize that the most difficult issues arise during the transition because there will   jexist, for a temporary period, approximately twice as many stations as are now in operation or will be in   [operation after the transition and the return of the analog station licenses. Toward the end of the period,   there will be an increasing redundancy of basic content between the analog and digital stations as the"|f,`(`(88"   Commission's simulcasting requirements become applicable. These two developments have broad   implications for the cable industry. To the extent that the Commission imposes a digital must carry   yrequirement, cable operators could be required to carry double the amount of television stations, that will   eventually carry identical content, while having to drop various and varied cable programming services   where channel capacity is limited. The central question addressed in this section is how must carry should be initiated during the transition to digital television.   S-  A'40.` ` In previous comments, the cable industry, as well as cable equipment manufacturers, have   Nargued that operators should not be required to carry both the analog television station and digital  S-  television station during the transition period.g] yO -#X\  P6G;P#эNCTA Comments at 5; General Instrument Comments at 20. They assert that system and equipment requirements to   jmeet an all channel carriage obligation would be prohibitively expensive. On the other hand, groups such   as the Broadcasters and Electronics Industry Association ("EIA") argue that a cable operator's must carry   obligations extend to both the digital broadcast television transmission and the analog signal during the  S -  transition period.h X] {O-  ԍBroadcasters Comments at 31; EIA Comments at 8. See also Association of America's Public Television Station's ("APTS") Comments at 30. EIA argues that simultaneous retransmission will allow consumers to experience the  S -  qualitative difference between the two formats and promote digital broadcast television deployment.:i ] yO"-ԍEIA Comments at 9.:   [Some parties argued that mandatory carriage of additional digital television broadcast stations would also   kbe contrary to the public interest because it may harm other video programmers. Viacom asserts that   digital broadcast television must carry requirements should not operate in such a way as to preempt the   .carriage of some broadcast station transmissions in favor of one broadcast station's multiplexed program  S-  services.kjB] yO-#X\  P6G;P#эViacom Reply Comments at 33.k It refers to those situations where a cable operator's onethird channel capacity signal carriage   requirement may be met through the carriage of certain analog and digital stations, while another   /broadcaster in the market, with a right of carriage, does not get carried. The Alliance for Community   Media argues that public, educational, and governmental access channels, as well as noncommercial   television stations, be given preference over additional channels incumbent broadcasters may want carried,  S@-  in order to maintain a diverse range of noncommercial voices on cable television.Tk@] yO-ԍAlliance for Community Media Comments at 28.T Below, we seek   comment on several carriage options that address the needs of the broadcasters and the concerns of the   cable operators as well as the timing of mandatory digital broadcast signal carriage rules. For each of   jthese options, we seek comment on how they comport with the existing language in the statute. We also   ask whether there are any other options that would serve the public interest and also be consistent with the statute.  S(-  `(41.` ` The Immediate Carriage Proposal. This first option would require all cable systems,   regardless of channel capacity constraints, to carry, in addition to the existing analog television stations,   all digital commercial television stations up to the onethird capacity limit and any additional digital   noncommercial stations within the limits currently found in the statute. This approach would provide   regulatory certainty to the television industry and provide assurance that investment in digital technology"b k,`(`(88"   .and programming will be fully realized. Moreover, digital broadcasters would be assured of reaching the   jaudience they are licensed to serve. This option may also accelerate the transition period and thus, speed   lthe recapture of the analog spectrum for auction by the Commission. At the same time, however,   significant cable channel lineup disruptions may occur as cable operators, whose systems are channel  locked, would have to drop existing cable programming services to accommodate the carriage of digital   .television signals. This option may also result in cable rate increases, as explained more fully below, for   digital broadcast services that the majority of subscribers will be unable to view, at least initially, because   they did not make the significant investment in digital television sets necessary to receive such signals.   .We seek comment on this first proposal. Are there additional arguments for or against this option? For   kexample, will broadcaster reliance on mandatory cable carriage discourage the development of antenna   technology? Furthermore, would program diversity be adversely affected? How will this proposal, if   yimplemented, alter retransmission consent negotiations? Would this approach discourage operators from   investing in system upgrades? What effect would such a proposal have on television stations that have   yet to build out their digital facilities? We also ask whether there should be exceptions to this proposal,   perhaps for operators in large television markets where a high number of new digital television stations will commence operations at the same time.  SX-  )42. ` ` If this option is adopted, we ask when the digital broadcast television must carry   requirement should take effect. There are several possible triggering events that are based on either the   Ldigital broadcast television buildout schedule, by rule, or through the enforcement process: (1) when the   first digital television station is broadcasting in a given television market; (2) when the majority of stations   in a given television market are broadcasting in a digital mode; (3) in tandem with the buildout schedule  S-  as set forth in the 5th Report and Order; (4) at the inception of the third must carry/retransmission consent   election cycle on January 1, 2000; or (5) upon the Commission grant of a must carry complaint filed by   the digital television broadcast station. We seek comment on which of these scenarios, or any other   joption, best reconciles the governmental interest in the rapid availability of digital broadcast television to cable subscribers with the other interests involved in this proceeding.  S-  *43. ` ` In addition, we seek comment on whether this proposal, as well as others that include a   mandatory carriage requirement, is consistent with Congressional intent. As previously noted, the   \continued availability of free overtheair television broadcast service was one of the primary reasons  S*-  Congress required mandatory cable carriage.lZ*] {O-  ,ԍSee discussion, supra at para. 5 (citing 1992 Cable Act,  2(a)(12)). See also H.R. Rep. No. 628, 102d Cong.,   2d Sess. 87 (1992) ("In an effort to ensure the continued availability of free overtheair broadcasting, the [1992 Cable Act] contains provisions that govern cable carriage of local broadcast signals.").  Similarly, one Congressional goal cited in the discussion  S-  of the transition to digital broadcasting was the future competitiveness of free overtheair broadcasting.UmZ] {O -  ԍSee, e.g., 134 Cong. Rec. E338701 (1988) ("There is a consensus in Congress that our broadcast television   .system should be kept viable by permitting, even encouraging, TV stations to use HDTV so they will remain competitive with cable and other media."). U   If the mandatory carriage provisions and the transition to digital television share a common purpose the   .continued availability of free overtheair television broadcast service should some form of must carry" m,`(`(88"   be required during the transition to digital television in order to satisfy the common purpose of the  S-mandatory carriage and digital television provisions?n] {O@-  ԍBut see para. 50, infra, presenting the proposal that mandatory digital broadcast signal carriage rules are not required until the transition period is over.  S-  }+44.` ` The System Upgrade Proposal. An alternative proposal would require only higher channel   -capacity cable systems to add new digital television stations as they commence operations and initiate their   digital overtheair service during the transition period. As systems reach 750 MHz (approximately 120   Manalog six MHz channels), considerable flexibility will exist to add new television stations. For cable   [systems that are in the process of increasing their channel capacity through transmission plant upgrades,   we would propose that new digital broadcast television stations must be carried by cable operators as they   =come on the air. We seek comment on this option in line with the questions delineated in paragraph 41,   above. We are specifically interested in the impact this proposal would have on a cable operator's   incentive to upgrade facilities and on facilities already upgraded. We seek comment on the extent to which upgraded cable systems have no additional capacity to add new services.  S -  ,45.` ` To provide a concise response to the above proposal, we seek comment on whether 750   .MHz is the proper cutoff for defining an upgraded system or should a lower number, such as 450 MHz  S -  (54 channels), be used instead.go "] {OD-ԍSee discussion on capacity issues at paras. 5861, infra.g We note that approximately 19 percent of the current analog cable   systems in the nation have 54 or more channels while the majority of cable systems, about 64 percent,  S2-  have between 3053 channels.7pZ2] {O-  ZԍFourth Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in Markets for the Delivery of Video Programming,   CS Docket 97141, FCC 97423 (rel. Jan. 13, 1998) at Table B3 (Channel Capacity of Cable Systems: October 1995October 1997).7 According to one report, some twothirds of cable systems are currently  S -  channellocked,Xq ] {O-ԍSee Nielsen's Cable OnLine Data Exchange.X meaning that they cannot add additional services without deleting another service or   through technical system enhancements. However, this situation may change in the future as cable   systems upgrade their physical plant and add new channel capacity. Thus, we also ask commenters to   provide information on the expected growth rate for cable channel capacity between now and 2003, when   all digital television stations are required to commence operation. In addition, we seek comment about   cable programmer plans to convert to digital and what additional carriage needs these programmers would have in the future.  S-  -46.` ` The PhaseIn Proposal. For cable systems that are not adding channel capacity or have   only a limited ability to add channels and have no unoccupied channel capacity, a requirement to   /immediately commence carriage of all digital broadcast television stations when they come ontheair   jwould possibly be highly disruptive to cable subscribers, especially in those markets where a substantial   number of stations are mandated to complete station construction by the same date. For example, stations   affiliated with the top four networks in the top 30 markets are scheduled to have construction complete   by November 1, 1999. The ten largest market have an average of 17 stations each with two markets   having 22 stations. There are 43 markets that have ten or more stations. Under this option, we would   .require that all cable systems commence some carriage of digital broadcast stations as they come onthe"h q,`(`(88"ԫ  air, but that some limit on the number that must be added be included in the transitional rules to avoid   substantial channel lineup disruptions. If this option is adopted, we would propose that three to five   kchannels be added each year until all digital television stations are carried. These could be either must   carry or retransmission consent stations. We seek comment on this schedule and its effects on the   transition. We seek comment on whether there is another phasein approach, such as adding three to five   channels every six months, that would also further the rapid introduction of digital broadcast television   while reducing, to the extent feasible, possible disruptions to the cable system's channel lineup. We also   ask how we would determine which digital television stations have carriage priority on the cable system in cases where the quota has been satisfied.  Sp-  ~.47. ` ` The EitherOr Proposal. Another proposal would be to require broadcasters to choose   mandatory carriage for either the analog signal or the digital transmission, but not both, during the early   years of the transition period. In the year 2005, when the 100 percent simulcast rule goes into effect, the   mandatory carriage option will default to the digital transmission. This option would avoid causing   channel lineup disruptions but may have an adverse effect on the speed of the transition process. We   seek comment on this approach and ask whether this proposal may be combined with any other transition   .option discussed. We also ask what effect this proposal would have on the economic viability of digital broadcasters, investment in digital broadcast technology, and on the sale of digital television receivers.  S -  p/48. ` ` The Equipment Penetration Proposal.  Under this option, we ask whether a carriage   kobligation should be triggered before any significant number of consumers have receivers or digitalto  \analog converter boxes that give them the ability to access digital transmissions. For example, should   carriage obligations commence when some percentage of the public, e.g., 5 percent or 10 percent, have   invested in receiving equipment? Such a requirement would recognize that in the cable context, the   addition of new digital broadcast television transmissions will likely result in the deletion or absence of   carriage of other services. The possibility of such a substitution is inherent in the whole mandatory   carriage policy, but the general assumption under the existing analog rules is that at least all subscribers   will have access to the new transmission in question and not just those who have invested in additional equipment.  ST-  3049. ` ` The Deferral Proposal. The sixth option is to defer the implementation of mandatory   kdigital broadcast signal carriage rules for a certain period of time. One possible deferral date would be   May 1, 2002. This would coincide with the date that stations not affiliated with ABC, CBS, NBC, and   zFox as well as digital commercial television stations in markets 31212, are required to initiate service.   /Waiting to issue regulations until this time has certain advantages. For example, it would allow cable   operators and broadcasters to find a successful business model for digital television. A deferral would   \also allow time for voluntary negotiations on cable carriage issues between the broadcasting and cable   [industries to settle some of the matters involved. It would allow time for technology to progress and for   [digital television receivers to come down in price. We seek comment on this proposal and its advantages and disadvantages as well as its impact on the transition period.  S"-  A150. ` ` The No Must Carry Proposal. The last option is that must carry does not apply at all for   digital television stations during the transition period. Section 614(b)(4)(B) states that "the Commission   shall initiate a proceeding to establish any changes in the signal carriage requirements of cable television   systems necessary to ensure cable carriage of such broadcast signals of local commercial television stations"(%q,`(`(88&"  S-  [which have been changed to conform with such modified standards" (emphasis added).Cr] yOh-ԍ47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(B).C NCTA argues   that the phrase "have been changed" means that the television station's analog signal has ceased   =broadcasting and the station's digital signal has replaced it as the over the air service. Under this reading,   digital broadcasters would not have must carry rights until the transition period is over. If this were the   case, we would propose the following. For commercial television stations, retransmission consent would   still apply. With regard to those commercial television stations that do not enforce their retransmission   [consent rights, or noncommercial television stations that lack retransmission consent rights, they are free   yto enter into voluntary carriage negotiations with cable operators. These broadcasters would be similarly   /situated with competing cable programming services in that they could pay to be placed on the cable   system or negotiate other mutual beneficial arrangements with cable operators. We seek comment on this   Lapproach. We ask how this proposal would affect the economic viability of digital television stations as   =well as the rapid transition to DTV. Moreover, should we recommend to Congress that noncommercial   television stations be vested with retransmission consent and program exclusivity rights in order to provide such entities with greater bargaining power visavis cable operators?  S -` `  S -  251.` ` With regard to those options where a must carry requirement is suggested, we note that   >the onethird capacity limit set forth in Section 614(b)(1)(B), is still applicable. When the onethird   Lcapacity limit has been reached, Section 614(b)(2) provides that "the cable operator shall have discretion  S2-  in selecting which such stations shall be carried on its cable system."@s2X] yO*-ԍ47 U.S.C. 534(b)(2).@ We believe that this statutory   directive would continue to apply in the digital context, if we conclude that mandatory digital signal   carriage is necessary. We seek comment on this interpretation. In the alternative, we ask whether it   would be desirable to adopt carriage priority rules. Would it be useful to accord priority to stations based   =on when they commence digital television broadcasting as a way of encouraging stations to speed up the   transition process? Should carriage priority be given to stations geographically closer to the operator's   Kprincipal headend to support the principal of localism? Alternatively, should priority be given to television   stations that are not affiliated with the top four networks as these were the stations most likely to have   chosen the must carry option in the analog context and also have less bargaining power relative to cable operators?  S-  Sz-C.Small Cable Systems   S*-  B  352. ` ` We seek comment on whether digital broadcast television carriage requirements, during   [the transition and afterward, will impose unique burdens on small cable systems or small cable operators   that warrant special consideration in the development of new digital broadcast signal carriage rules. The   Broadcasters recognize that small cable systems may find it difficult to accommodate digital broadcast   [television signals. Therefore, they suggest that the Commission may consider adopting phasein rules or   policies for cable carriage of digital broadcast television signals but that such rules or policies should   mrecognize cable's role in working with broadcasters to avail the public of the benefits of digital  S -  technology.Ct ] yO%-ԍBroadcaster Comments at 34.C Although small cable operators may be able to pass through a digital broadcast signal to   ysubscribers, there still may be significant equipment costs and channel capacity loss involved in order for   .a cable operator to deliver digital broadcast television. Small cable operators may not be able to upgrade"!xt,`(`(88U#"   their systems, or invest in digital compression technology, due to financial constraints and thus, may delay  S-  =their transition to digital.u"] {O@-  ԍSee Kent Gibbons, What's a 'Classic' MSO To Do?, MULTICHANNEL NEWS, December 8, 1997 at 6 ("For   every Adelphia Communications Corp., vowing to have digital video and cable modems available to 90 percent of   its 2 millionsubscriber universe by year's end, there's a CableOne [an MSO with small systems], planning to avoid digital video for the next 18 to 24 months. . . .")  As such, these entities, that have been accorded special regulatory status by  S-  \Congress and the Commission in other areas, such as rate regulation,vX] yO-  h#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 543(m) (upper tier rate regulation of small systems repealed by the 1996 Telecommunications Act;   no rate regulation for the basic service tier if that was the only service tier subject to regulation as of December 31, 1994, in any franchise area in which the operator serves 50,000 or fewer subscribers.) may be the subjects of special treatment when it comes to the carriage of digital broadcast television transmissions.  S8-  n453. ` ` We seek comment on how to define small systems and small cable operators in the context   of digital must carry. We see alternative definitions to choose from: those found in the must carry  S-  provisions of the Act and those found in the rate regulation context.Fw ] {OZ-  ԍA small cable system under the Act's must carry provisions is one with twelve or fewer activated channels.  {O$-See 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(1)(A); 47 U.S.C. 535(b)(2)(A).   A small cable system under the Act's rate regulation provisions is one that has a 1000 or fewer subscribers. 47   U.S.C. 543(i). A small cable operator under the Act's rate regulation provisions is one that, "directly or through   Jan affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than one 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." 47 U.S.C. 543(m)(2).   jThe Commission has developed, with SBA's approval, our own definitions of "small" for the purposes of rate   regulation. A "small cable company" under our rules is one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide. 47   =C.F.R. 76.901(e). A "small system" under our rules is a cable television system that serves 15,000 or fewer   xsubscribers. 47 C.F.R. 76.901(C). The Commission developed these definitions based on its determinations that  {O-  a small cable system operator is one with annual revenues of $100 million or less. Sixth Report and Order and  {OP-Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, MM Docket Nos. 92266 and 93215, 10 FCC Rcd 7393 (1995). F We seek comment on which   \definition furthers the transition to digital broadcast television while, at the same time, recognizes the   unique circumstances of the small cable operator. Are there other definitions that we have not considered?   As for relief, we ask, for example, whether the Commission should decide that as long as the small system   or small operator carries all of the local analog television signals, it need not carry the digital television   transmissions as well. Alternatively, we ask whether the Commission should allow small cable operators   Mto file petitions for special relief requesting a waiver of any digital broadcast television carriage rule if   financial hardship is demonstrated. With regard to retransmission consent and its effect on small cable   operators, we seek comment on whether the Commission should prohibit tying arrangements where an   operator must carry the broadcaster's digital signal as a precondition for carriage of the analog signal.   kWe seek comment on the scope of our statutory authority to redefine small cable operators and small systems and provide them with special relief.  S- "Zw,`(`(88"Ԍ S-8D. Open Video Systems   S-  554. ` ` Section 653(c)(1) of the Act provides that any provision that applies to cable operators   @under Sections 614, 615 and 325, shall apply to open video system operators certified by the  S`-  C8ommission.@x`] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 573(c)(1).@ Section 653(c)(2)(A) provides that, in applying these provisions to open video system   joperators, the Commission "shall, to the extent possible, impose obligations that are no greater or lesser"  S-  than the obligations imposed on cable operators.CyX] yO -ԍ47 U.S.C. 573(c)(2)(A).C The Commission, in implementing the statutory   language, held that there are no public policy reasons to justify treating an open video system operator  S-  \differently from a cable operator in the same local market for purposes of broadcast signal carriage.z] {OH -  ԍSee Implementation of Section 302 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 18223, 1830708 (1996).   =Thus, OVS operators generally have the same requirements for the carriage of local television stations as   ydo cable operators except that these entities are under no obligation to place television stations on a basic  SH -  service tier.({H B] {O*-  ԍId. at 1830809, n.371. We note, however, that an OVS operator must make qualified local commercial and  {O-noncommercial educational television stations available to every subscriber. See 47 C.F.R. 76.1506(e).( OVS operators are also obligated to abide by Section 325 and the Commission's rules  S -  implementing retransmission consent.e| ] {O^-ԍSee 47 U.S.C. 573(c)(1)(B); 11 FCC Rcd at 1831113.e We seek comment on the impact digital must carry and   retransmission consent will have on OVS operators and whether and how rules for these entities should be different than the rules for cable operators.  S - E.  Television Stations Eligible for Carriage  S0-  Q655. ` ` Sections 614(a) and (h), and 615(a) and (l) establish the qualifications for cable carriage   eligibility as it pertains to full power commercial television stations (market based eligibility standards),   klow power commercial television stations (six statutory qualifications), and noncommercial television   stations (mileage and technical based standards). At this time, we see no need to deviate from the existing   !eligibility requirements for these three categories of stations. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.  S-  n756. ` ` The issue of overtheair signal reception quality at the headend of the cable system is also   jinvolved in this discussion as it defines which digital television stations, from a technical perspective, are   eligible for carriage. Section 614(h)(1)(B)(iii) states that a television station that does not deliver a good   quality signal to the cable operator's headend, and does not agree to pay for the equipment necessary to   improve the signal, is not qualified to assert its must carry rights. Under the current regime, television   broadcast stations must deliver either a signal level of 45dBm for UHF signals or 49dBm for VHF  S(-  signals at the input terminals of the signal processing equipment, to be considered eligible for carriage.}(0 ] yO%-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(h)(1)(B)(iii); 47 C.F.R. 76.55(c)(3).   We seek comment on how the Act's signal quality exception test applies to digital transmissions. We have" },`(`(88z"   \previously stated that, in order to ease the transition, and to be considered to have complied with the   construction schedule, a broadcaster only initially needs to emit a digital transmission strong enough to  S-  >encompass its community of license.~~] {O-ԍSee Fifth Report and Order in MM Docket 87268, 12 FCC Rcd at 12847.~ We ask how this policy may affect the carriage of the digital   television transmission. We seek comment on whether the Commission's analog signal strength standards   are relevant to digital broadcast television or new good quality signal parameters, which include normal system processing degradations and account for bit rate error, are necessary.  S-  857.` ` The language of Section 614(b)(4)(B) states that the Commission should initiate a   \proceeding to establish any changes in the signal carriage requirements of cable television systems are  S-  Lnecessary "to ensure cable carriage of such broadcast signals of local commercial television stations. . .."   /(emphasis added). The question here is the nature and existence of carriage rights for noncommercial   zdigital television stations, since they are not explicitly discussed in this section. We note that Section   615(a) of the Act states that "each cable operator shall carry on the cable system of that cable operator,  S -  any qualified local noncommercial educational television station requesting carriage."E Z] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 535(a). E APTS argues that   this provision is broad enough to require cable operators to carry both the analog and digital signals of  S -public television stations.U ] {O4-ԍSee, e.g., APTS Comments at 33. U We seek comment on the statutory language and on APTS' interpretation.  S -  SZ-F.Capacity  S -  958. ` ` Section 614(b)(1)(B) provides that a cable operator, with more than 12 usable activated   channels, shall not have to devote more than "onethird of the aggregate number of usable activated  S-  channels"|] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. 76.56(b)(1). to local commercial broadcast signal carriage purposes. Determining a cable operator's   capacity when digital content is involved and therefore how many commercial television station signals   must be carried, is thus an issue in this proceeding. The cable industry has commented that operators lack  SB-  capacity to accommodate both the analog signal and digital transmission.?B ] yO-ԍNCTA Comments at 5, 13.? Broadcasters, on the other   hand, have asserted that cable operators are technically capable of fulfilling any digital broadcast television  S-  must carry requirement and that lack of capacity is a misleading argument.C] yO. -ԍBroadcaster Comments at 33.C They state that one 6 MHz   digital cable channel could carry at least 8 digitally compressed analog NTSC signals or two HDTV  S-  lchannels, or a compressed NTSC channel and 4 multicast SDTV channels.1, ] {On#-ԍId.1 Thus, while the Act   \provides that a cable operator should not have to devote more than "onethird of aggregate number of  SR-  .usable activated channels"R ] yO&-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. 76.56(b)(1). to local broadcast signal carriage purposes, there is some dispute as to how capacity should be defined in a digital environment. "*N ,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  ԙ:59.` ` Accordingly, we solicit comments on the definition of "usable activated channels" in the   context of digital broadcast television carriage. Many cable operators now have, or soon will have, the   =technical ability to fit several analog programming services onto one 6 MHz channel. Thus, in answering   this question, we ask how advances in signal compression technology affect the definition of capacity.   We also ask whether the onethird channel capacity requirement for digital broadcast television carriage   jpurposes means onethird of a cable operator's digital channel capacity or onethird of all 6 MHz blocks, including both the analog and digital channels.  S-  ;60. ` ` We see three possible options in determining capacity: (1) each programming service   ]counts as one channel; (2) each 6 MHz block of spectrum counts as one channel; or (3) the digital   capacity should be by data throughput, i.e. bits per second of digital data. We seek comment on the   ybenefits and drawbacks on each of these options. We also ask whether the Act permits the Commission   [to redefine the meaning of capacity in this context. We note, as discussed above, that the ability of cable   [operators to carry more than a single digital broadcast television signal in a 6 MHz channel is dependent   on whether the transmission is carried in its original format or whether changes in format may be  S -permitted, and ask commenters to address this distinction in discussing the capacity issue. " ] yO-  ԍA somewhat similar issue was addressed in connection with the adoption of the "open video system" rules   iwhere the system operator, if demand exceeds capacity, is limited to selecting the video programming service on   no more than onethird of the activated channel capacity. The rules adopted address the capacity issue in terms of  {Oh-bandwidth. Second Report and Order in Docket 9646, 11 FCC Rcd 18223.  SX-  <61. ` ` We seek quantified estimates and forecasts of usable channel capacity. Are there   differences in channel capacity that are based on franchise requirements, patterns of ownership, geographic   location, or other factors? What is the average number of channels dedicated to various categories of   programming, such as payperview, leased access, local and nonlocal broadcast channels, and others that   jwould assist us in understanding the degree to which capacity is, and will be, available over the next two,   five, eight years, or beyond? What methods are appropriate to forecast the comparison between usable   channel capacity and potential broadcast needs, nationally, during the transition (or other appropriate timeframe)?  S-  S-G . Material Degradation  S-  S-  =62. ` ` Section 614(b)(4)(A) of the Act, discussing the cable system's treatment and processing of analog broadcast station signals, provides that:  3XThe signals of local commercial television stations that a cable operator carries shall be  carried without material degradation. The Commission shall adopt carriage standards to  ensure that, to the extent technically feasible, the quality of the signal processing and  carriage provided by a cable system for the carriage of local commercial television  2stations will be no less than that provided by the system for carriage of any other type of  S`-signal. `] yO$-  M#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(A); 47 U.S.C. 535(g)(2) ("A cable operator shall provide each qualified local   jnoncommercial educational station whose signal is carried in accordance with this section with bandwidth and   technical capacity equivalent to that provided to commercial television stations carried on the cable system and shall   Jcarry the signal of each qualified local noncommercial educational television station without material degradation");" ',`(`(7'" 47 C.F.R. 76.62(b)(d). "`X,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  ԙ>63.` ` In the context of digital broadcast signal carriage, this raises two quite distinct questions.   lFirst, to what extent should this preclude cable operators from altering the digital format of digital   broadcast television signal when the transmission is processed at the system headend or in customer   premises equipment, such as the set top box, that is part of the cable system or is attached to it? And   >second, regardless of the transmission format, what standards and measurement tools are available to address disputes relating to the quality of the digital broadcast television signal?  S-  #?64.` ` The first issue essentially has to do with tradeoffs between different modulation methods   and transport specifications that may be optimized for different media and the savings involved in having   a common receiver for signals or bitstreams received from different transmission paths. As described   zabove, broadcasters are using 8 VSB while the cable industry has favored 64 or 256 QAM. The cable   yoperators' selection of a transmission methodology other than 8 VSB reflect their ability to carry a higher data rate, and make more use of their capacity, than they would if they used the broadcast system.  S -  $@65. ` ` In comments in the previous phase of this proceeding, the broadcasters argue that the   material degradation mandate should be strictly applied so that each cable system must carry the digital   broadcast television signal in its original overtheair format so that the public can receive the full extent  SX-of the station's capabilities, including the station's full high definition capabilities.CXX] yOP-ԍBroadcaster Comments at 34.C  S-  nA66. ` ` The cable industry's concern in this area is that operators should be allowed to demodulate   and repack the digital broadcast television signal into a higher bitrate package because it would result in   [a more efficient use of cable network capacity than any broadcaster proposed engineering plan to merely   passthrough the bitstream on an equivalent basis, i.e., a 6 MHz broadcast signal on a 6 MHz cable  Sh-channel.Jh] yO-ԍGeneral Instrument Comments at 19.J  S-  CB67. ` ` We recognize one important action that may constitute material degradation. x] yO0-  ZԍWe note that the cable operator may convert the digital television broadcaster's VSB transmission into the cable QAM transmission as well as convert the digital television signal into an analog television signal.  It   involves the cable operator's conversion of the broadcaster's digital transmission into another digital   format, perhaps one with lower picture resolution. We seek comment on this possibility and whether such   a conversion should be prohibited. Are there other degradation possibilities that we have not considered?   Additionally, does the term "material" in the statute suggest that some "de minimis" amount of degradation is permissible?  S-  C68.` ` Aside from the matters discussed above, questions arise as to what standards and   measurement techniques the Commission should employ where specific disputes as to digital broadcast   Lsignal quality develop. Picture and sound quality issues in a digital environment implicate standards and   measurement techniques that are quite different than those that arise in the analog environment. In the   analog situation, issues involving signal strength, signal to noise ratios, and ghosting are the focus of   concern. In the digital situation, picture resolution is still a concern but bit error rates and data throughput"8,`(`(88 "   are also relevant. Moreover, the technical standards that are employed to evaluate cable analog picture   quality were adopted and refined over the course of many decades. We tentatively conclude that it would   ?be premature to attempt to replicate parallel digital standards before digital broadcasting has even   commenced. In this regard, we seek suggestions for any standards that may be used in addressing signal   ?degradation issues. How, and where, should degradation be measured? For example, should it be   measured before the signal is processed by the set top box, if such a device is involved, or should it be   kmeasured at the input of the digital receiver? We recognize that, under the Act, the signal quality of a   klocal commercial television station carried by a cable system will be no less than that provided by the  S-  system for carriage of any other type of signal.v] {O( -ԍSee 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(4)(A). See also 47 U.S.C. 535(g)(2).v Does this mean that if an operator carried a cable  S-  programming service, such as HBO,Z] {O -  ԍHBO announced that it will use 1080i for its HDTV channels. See Jim Barthold, HBO Chooses 1080i for  {O\ -HDTV Transmissions, CABLE WORLD, May 4, 1998 at 20. in the 1080i HDTV format, then it must carry, without material   .degradation, all local commercial television stations that also provide 1080i HDTV signals? Would such   /a channel comparison test be a viable degradation measurement technique, at least for HDTV picture   quality? Alternatively, we ask whether degradation should be gauged through the use of bit error rate and  S -  signaltonoise ratio  ] yON-  ԍThe measurement techniques for digital signal power and noise power are different than those techniques   ;measuring analog power and noise. For example, for a 6 MHz channel, the DTV measurement is the average power   of the signal within the 6 MHz channel, whereas for the analog signal, it is the peak power of the signal during the synchronization pulse. measurements. In other words, it may be that as long as the bit error rate is minimal, then any conversion process cannot be said to materially degrade the signal.  S -  S -H. Carriage of Duplicate Analog and Digital Signals  S0-  ~D69. ` ` Section 614(b)(5) of the Communications Act provides that "a cable operator shall not   Lbe required to carry the signal of any local commercial television station that substantially duplicates the  S-  Lsignal of another local television station which is carried on the cable system . . . ."h] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(5). h Parallel provisions  S-  also apply to the carriage of noncommercial stations.. ] {O-  K#X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 U.S.C. 535(b)(3)(C) and (e). We note that the substantial duplication provision does not apply to cable systems with 12 or fewer channels. Congress stated that these provisions were   intended to preserve the cable operator's editorial discretion while ensuring that the public has access to  Sh-  Mdiverse local signals.h ] yO!-#d6X@`7 |@## X\  P6G;P#эS. Rep. No. 92, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. at 85 (1991). Because it is likely, and indeed mandated, that at some point in the transition   [process there be a duplication of program content between analog and digital broadcast transmissions, an integral part of the overall carriage question is the issue of how to treat duplicative programming.  S-  PE70. ` ` We see alternative approaches to defining "duplication" in the digital age. The first option   would be modeled after the current approach for analog signal duplication and focus on the stations'   program content so that the nonduplication provision would apply even though the signals were   transmitted in different formats. In the analog signal context, the Commission has determined that two"P ,`(`(88"   ^commercial television stations will be considered to substantially duplicate each other "if they  S-  Msimultaneously broadcast identical programming for more than 50 percent of the broadcast week."] {O@-  #X\  P6G;P#эMust Carry Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 2981. The term, "identical" in this context means the identical  {O -  episode of the same programming series. Id. The Commission also concluded that an NCE station does not   substantially duplicate the programming of another NCE station if at least 50 percent of its typical weekly   Yprogramming is distinct from programming on the other station either during prime time or during hours other than  {Od-prime time. Id. at 2970.   Thus, if a broadcaster aired substantially the same material over its digital station, as it does over its   analog station, the operator would not be obligated to carry both. Second, because they each use different   transmission formats, the analog signal and digital bitstream could be considered not duplicative even if  S8-  they contain identical program content.,8~] yOV -  ԍWe note in this regard that APTS earlier argued that the Commission should modify the definition of   substantial duplication so that the transmission of programming in different formats (digital broadcast television v.   zanalog) to different audiences (consumers with and without digital television sets) would not be considered   Yduplicative within the meaning of Section 615 for noncommercial educational television stations. APTS comments at 33., This would be most clearly the case where one of the   broadcasts was in a high definition format and the other was not. Third, the substantial duplication   requirement may not apply in the digital world because Congress may have intended that the provision   be used where there were two different television stations involved, not the same licensee transmitting   programming in both an analog and digital format. We seek comment on each of these possibilities. In   answering this inquiry, we seek comment on the meaning of the term "duplicative" when applied to digital   broadcast television signals. For example, should a multiplexed broadcast signal that includes cable   programming that is already carried by the operator, be considered duplicative? Moreover, how should   /the term "station" be defined in this context? Does the term "another" in the statute suggest that the   .signals in question must come from two different stations, not the same one? We also seek comment on   whether a definition that requires carriage of identical analog and digital signals would result in other   Mcommercial broadcast programming not being carried because the onethird channel capacity has been reached.  S0-  S-I.X Primary Video (#  S-  F71. ` ` Section 614(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires cable operators to carry the "primary video" of  S-  yeach of the local commercial television stations carried on the cable system.^X. ] yO^-  ԍ"A cable operator shall carry in its entirety, on the cable system of that operator, the primary video,   Zaccompanying audio, and line 21 closed caption transmission of each of the local commercial television stations carried on the cable system. . ." 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(3)(A).^ A parallel provision exists  Sh-  for noncommercial educational television stations.@hN ] yOV"-ԍ47 U.S.C. 535(g)(1).@ The general question here is how to define "primary   video" during the transition period when both an analog and digital signal will be broadcast. Could the   Lanalog signal be considered primary but not the digital signal since the former can be received by all cable   subscribers with analog television sets? Moreover, broadcasters, under the digital television rules, have   ?flexibility in choosing to broadcast either high definition or multiple standard definition television"!,`(`(88"  S-  transmissions, or a mixture of both, over the course of a broadcast day.] {Oh-ԍSee, e.g., Fifth Report and Order in MM Docket 87268, 12 FCC Rcd at 12826. Thus, how should "primary   video" be defined in the context of a digital service that broadcasts multiple streams of video   programming. If the primary video includes less than all of the streams of programming broadcast, we   seek comment on which video programming services provided by a licensee should be considered primary   and should be entitled to carriage. Should the definition be flexible, allowing the broadcaster to alternate   lwhich of its transmissions would be considered primary over time? How do the answers to these   questions reflect on the development of both digital broadcasting and on the services provided and rates charged by cable operators?  S-  S-J. Ancillary and Supplementary Services  SH -  }G72. ` ` Section 336 of the Act provides that "no ancillary or supplementary service shall have any  S -  right to carriage under section 614 or 615." X Z] yO-  #X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 336(b)(3). Section 336(a)(2) provides that the Commission shall allow the holders of licenses for   ,advanced television service station "to offer such ancillary or supplementary services . . . as may be consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity."  Section 614(b)(3) of the Act requires cable operators to   carry "to the extent technically feasible, programrelated material carried in the vertical blanking interval   or on subcarriers" but states that "[r]etransmission of other material in the vertical blanking interval or   zother nonprogramrelated material (including teletext and other subscription and advertisersupported  S -  information services) shall be at the discretion of the cable operator."v z] {O-#X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 C.F.R. 76.62(f).v Our task here is to define what  SX-  "ancillary or supplementary" mean in the context of digital broadcast television carriage. ( X  yO-  ,ԍThe broadcasting industry, in the legislative process, provided the following examples of services, "other than broadcast service" which might be provided under the "ancillary or supplementary" provision of Section 336:  @Xservices which would offer viewers information supplementing a broadcast program (such as team  or player statistics during a sporting event, background information on people in the news, etc.);  "multiple video services; broadcasts of schoolclosing and other emergency information on a `real  time' basis so that consumers could obtain this information at their convenience; electronic  `newspapers' which could be provided to wireless fax machines or to other types of receivers; or medical information services broadcast in encrypted form only to doctors and hospitals.    Letter from Edward O. Fritts on behalf of NAB, INTV, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox to TheHonorableEdward J.   Markey, March 7, 1994. Hearings Before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the United States Senate on S. 1822, May 4, 1994. We seek comment on possible definitions that are consistent with the language of Section 614(b)(3).  S-  A H73. ` ` We note that Section 336 of the 1996 Act also states that "no ancillary or supplementary   service shall . . . .be deemed a multichannel video programming distributor for purposes of section 628."   Section 628 contains the program access requirements pursuant to which multichannel video programming   ydistributors have rights to demand access to certain satellite delivered cable programming in which a cable"h",`(`(88d"  S-  operator has an attributable interest.e] yOh-  #X\  P6G;P#эThe Act allows MVPDs competing with cable access to satellite delivered programming and also prohibits   xexclusive programming contracts between an incumbent cable operator and an affiliated cable programmer unless   the Commission finds that the exclusivity is in the public interest. The Act states that the purpose of this section   ,is to increase competition and diversity in the multichannel video programming market, to increase the availability   ;of satellite cable programming and satellite broadcast programming to persons in rural and other areas not currently  {OP-  -able to receive such programming, and to spur the development of communications technologies. See 47 U.S.C.   L548(a); 47 C.F.R. 76.10001004. Section 602(13) states: "[T]he term 'multichannel video programming   distributor' means a person such as, but not limited to, a cable operator, a multichannel multipoint distribution   service, a direct broadcast satellite service, or a television receiveonly satellite program distributor, who makes available for purchase, by subscribers or customers, multiple channels of video programming."e We seek comment on whether the Act's language provides any insight as to the ancillary or supplementary service definition.  S- K.  Use of PEG Channels for DTV Purposes  S8-  #I74.` ` Section 615(d) and 614(c)(2) of the Act provides that a cable operator required to add the   =signals of qualified local noncommercial educational stations and qualified low power television stations,   respectively, may do so by placing such additional stations on unused public, educational or governmental   !("PEG") channels not in use for their designated purposes, subject to the approval of franchising  S-  authorities.b ] {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 U.S.C. 535(d) (for noncommercial educational television stations) and 534(c)(2) (for low power  {Od-television stations); See also 47 C.F.R. 76.56(c). Pursuant to Section 611 of the Act, the franchising authority determines how much of a  Sp-  cable operator's channel capacity, if any, will be set aside for PEG use.B"p ] {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 U.S.C. 531(d) ("In the case of any franchise under which channel capacity is designated [for PEG   Lchannels], the franchising authority shall prescribe (1) rules and procedures under which the cable operator is   ;permitted to use such channel capacity for the provision of other services if such channel capacity is not being used for the purposes designated, and (2) rules and procedures under which such permitted use shall cease.")B The Commission, when   implementing the analog must carry rules, declined to adopt stringent requirements regarding the use of   PEG channels for must carry purposes because we believed that these matters are more appropriately  S -  Lresolved by individual franchising authorities.t ] {O@-#X\  P6G;P#эMust Carry Order at 2972, 2984.t We seek comment on whether the DTV signals of NCE  S -  stations :] yO-  jԍWe note that the questions and issues raised above for NCE digital television stations are contingent on whether these entities have digital carriage rights at all. and LPTV stations should be allowed on PEG channels under the same framework accorded analog television signals.  S - ` `  SX- L.XTier Position (#  S-  J75. ` ` Section 614(b)(7) provides that all commercial mustcarry signals shall be provided to   [every subscriber of a cable system and shall be viewable on all television receivers of subscribers that are  S-  jconnected by the cable operator or for which the cable operator provides a connection.g] yO&-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(7).g Section 615(h)"#",`(`(88"   provides that noncommercial educational stations, that are entitled to carriage, shall be "available to every   .subscriber as part of the cable system's lowest price service tier that includes the retransmission of local  S-  commercial television broadcast signals."=] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 535(h).= We seek comment on whether the operator must place the   =broadcaster's digital transmissions on the same basic tier where the analog channels are found or whether   a separate digital basic service tier could be established that would be available only to subscribers with the capacity to view the contents of the digital broadcast signals.  S-  }K76. ` ` During the transition period, there may be situations where the carriage of digital broadcast   \signals could properly be associated with the carriage of digital cable channels because of their similar   Ldigital picture or interactive characteristics, or may otherwise be provided only to subscribers capable of   \using digital video. By associating the digital broadcast and cable channels in terms of tier placement,   subscribers that are equipped to receive digital signals will be assured of receiving digital broadcast signals   and subscribers not so equipped would not be obliged to subscribe to services that they are not equipped   to receive. We seek comment on this general concept or on other means whereby subscribers' reception   Mcapabilities could be matched with the tier package they are required by regulation to receive. Do we   have the authority to implement such a proposal? Moreover, should there be parallel tier placement rules,   kone for analog cable systems that do not offer digital services, and one for cable systems that do offer   Mdigital services? We also seek comment on the legal issues that might be associated with having more   ]than a single basic tier in order to accommodate the carriage of digital broadcast signals. Once the   transition period ends, our tentative view is that the basic service tier would be required to include, at a   minimum, digital broadcast signals and public, educational, and governmental access channels. This will   satisfy the statute's directive of assuring that all cable subscribers are able to view broadcast material on the lowest priced tier available.  S@-  `L77. ` ` Also pursuant to Section 614(b)(7), if a cable operator authorizes subscribers to install   .additional receiver connections, but does not provide the subscriber with such connections, the operator   shall notify such subscribers of all broadcast stations carried on the cable system which cannot be viewed  S-  !via cable without a converter box.gX] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(7).g In such cases, the cable operator shall offer to sell or lease a   converter box to such subscribers at rates in accordance with the standards established by the Commission  Sx-  pursuant to Section 623(b)(3).@x] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 543(b)(3).@ We seek comment on the application of this provision to the carriage   of digital broadcast television stations. We specifically ask whether this provision would require cable   operators to offer converter boxes to every subscriber if digital broadcast television stations cannot be received without some settop device facilitating reception of the stations' transmissions.  S-  S- M.XChannel Position (#  S`-  M78. ` ` In addition to tier position requirements, we also need to determine the specific channel   rights digital broadcast television stations should have. Section 614(b)(6) provides for four channel   positioning options for commercial television stations: (1) the channel number on which the station   broadcasts overtheair; (2) the channel on which the station was carried on July 19, 1985; (3) the channel   on which it was carried on January 1, 1992; and (4) any other channel number as is mutually agreed upon"!$x,`(`(88U#"  S-  by the station and the cable operator.] yOh-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. 76.57(a). Noncommercial television stations have three channel positioning   options under Section 615(g)(5): (1) the channel number on which the station is broadcast overtheair;   (2) the channel on which the station was carried on July 19, 1985; and (3) any other channel number as  S-  >is mutually agreed upon by the station and the cable operator.X] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 535(g)(5); 47 C.F.R. 76.57(b). We seek comment on which of the   statutory options remain applicable in a digital environment. Commenters should also focus their attention   on the carriage of multiple SDTV programming streams and describe how channel positioning should vest in this situation.  S-  oN79. ` ` In earlier comments, the Broadcasters maintain that television stations should have the   option of electing the channel on which the digital broadcast television signal is carried, so that each   zstation would be able to retain its channel identity from cable system to cable system, and so that the  SH -  Nanalog and digital channels be found together on the cable system.CH ] yO-ԍBroadcaster Comments at 35.C They also maintain that the   Congressional intent behind the Act's channel positioning mandate, i.e., to prevent the anticompetitive   conduct of the cable operator placing the television station on an undesirable, higher cable channel,  S -remains valid. x] {O-  iԍId. See 1992 Cable Act, 2(a)(15) ("A cable television system which carries the signal of a local television   ;broadcaster is assisting the broadcaster to increase its viewership, and thereby attract additional advertising revenues   that otherwise might be earned by the cable system operator. As a result, there is an economic incentive for cable  yOB-  systems to terminate the retransmission of the broadcast signal, refuse to carry new signals, or reposition a broadcast signal to a disadvantageous channel position.")  We seek comment on this proposal.   S -  O80.` ` The new digital broadcast television table of allotments typically does not correspond to   a television station's analog channel number but the advent of advanced programming retrieval systems   and other channel selection devices may alleviate the need for specific channel positioning requirements  S-  as subscribers will be able to locate a television station with little degree of difficulty.* ] {O-  ԍSee, e.g., Joel Brinkley, Television Stations Fear for Their "Channel Brand" as Choices Proliferate in the  {O-  Digital Age, NEW YORK TIMES, December 29, 1997 at D9 (The television industry's solution to the loss of the   analog channel brand is onscreen menus: "Viewers tuning to Channel 5 will not see the program right away.   Instead, they will see a small program grid, similar to those in a newspaper television listing. But this one will list   only the various programs being broadcast from that stationthe old analog channel, the new digital channel and, possibly, the several program streams showing on that one.") Additionally,  S-  channel mapping protocols ("PSIP")NX] yO&"-  ԍThis acronym stands for Program and System Information Protocol. This is the standard protocol under   xdevelopment for transmission of the relevant data tables contained within digital packets carried in the transport  yO#-stream multiplex. N have been developed that will technically link the digital channel"%,`(`(88"  S-  number with that assigned to the analog channel.z] yOh-  ԍThe Advanced Television Systems Committee technical specifications pair the digital transmission with the  {O0-  analog signal.  See Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable, ATSC Document   iA/65 (Dec. 23, 1997) ("For broadcasters with existing NTSC licenses, the major channel number for the existing   NTSC channels, as well as the Digital TV channels, controlled by the broadcaster, shall be set to the current NTSC   RF channel number. [ ] Assume a broadcaster who has an NTSC broadcast license for RF channel 13 is assigned   RF channel 39 for Digital ATSC broadcast. That broadcaster will use major channel number 13 for identification of the analog NTSC channel on RF channel 13, as well as the digital channels it is controlling on RF channel 39.") Given these developments, we ask whether the   Commission $xC   $xC should refrain from promulgating new channel positioning requirements and allow   .technology, as discussed above, to resolve the matter. We seek comment on the extent to which PSIP is   \the subject of voluntary standards setting processes in the cable, broadcast, and consumer electronics   /industries and what the timing and outcome of such voluntary processes are likely to be. Moreover,   recognizing that channel positioning is important to ensure the successful introduction of an individual   digital television station on a cable system with dozens of other channels, we ask whether deference to   technology to resolve the positioning issues here will be the appropriate solution. We also seek comment on whether this option would be consistent with the statutory channel positioning requirements.  Sp-  P81. ` ` Another alternative would be to allow the operator to place the digital television   .transmission on any cable channel of its choice, subject to certain conditions, such as: (1) that the digital   zchannel identification or PSIP information be clearly available for use by the subscriber's receiver; (2)   that all analog and digital channel placement decisions must comply with tier placement requirements; and   >(3) once a station has been assigned a channel position, the cable operator may not move it from that  S -  kposition for at least three years except where a move is authorized by the broadcaster. These general   requirements would give the operator greater leeway in configuring its channel lineup. We seek comment   on this particular proposal and ask commenters to focus on the legal, technical, and economic issues involved.  S-  $Q82. ` ` We also seek comment on whether advanced programming retrieval systems and other   Lchannel selection devices provided by cable operators which, in effect, filter and prioritize programming,   present another series of challenges similar to those that gave rise to Congress' channel positioning   requirements. If so, we ask whether any rules are necessary to ensure fair competition between electronic programming guides controlled by cable operators and those that are controlled by broadcasters.  S- ` `  S- N. X Television Market Changes (#  S-  R83. ` ` Television stations have carriage rights throughout the market to which they are assigned.   |Pursuant to Section 614(h)(1)(C), at the request of either a broadcaster or a cable operator, the   Commission may, with respect to a particular television broadcast station, include additional communities   {within its television market or exclude communities from such station's television market to better   effectuate the purposes of the Act's must carry provisions. The Commission's inclusion of additional   .communities within a station's ADI imposes new must carry requirements on cable operators subject to   kthe modification request while the grant to exclude communities from a station's ADI removes a cable   operator's obligation to carry a certain station's signal. In considering market modification requests, the   Act provides that the Commission shall afford particular attention "to the value of localism" by taking   into account such factors as (1) whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, have been   historically carried on the cable system or systems within such community; (2) whether the television" & ,`(`(88u!"   station provides coverage or other local service to such community; (3) whether any other television   station that is eligible to be carried by a cable system in such community in fulfillment of the requirements   of this section provides news coverage of issues of concern to such community or provides carriage or   Lcoverage of sporting and other events of interest to the community; and (4) evidence of viewing patterns   !in cable and noncable households within the areas served by the cable system or systems in such  S8-  community.8] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(h)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. 76.59. We seek comment on whether any change to the market modification process is warranted   Mto accommodate the difference between analog and digital broadcasting and the fact that the signals in   question have neither a history of carriage nor measured audience. We also seek comment on whether there are alternative means to resolve market structure issues for new digital broadcast television stations.  S-  Sp-  S84. ` ` We also inquire as to whether changes in signal strength and Grade B contour coverage,;XpX] yOh -  ԍWe note that the Commission has used the LongleyRice model to determine a digital television station's   technical coverage area. This model could also be used to determine coverage in the context of television market modification proceedings.;   \because of new digital television station channel assignments and power limits, will result in different   carriage obligations for cable operators. We focus on those instances where the Commission has redefined   an analog station's television market based, in part, on Grade B contour coverage and has either granted   or denied a must carry complaint based on a analog station's signal strength measurements. Should the   digital television station's technical characteristics have any bearing on the analog television station's market area, or vice versa?   S0-  ~T85. ` ` We previously held that television markets for must carry eligibility purposes are to be  S-  Pdetermined by Arbitron's ADIs through December 31, 1999,\x] {O -  #X\  P6G;P#эSee Definition of Markets for Purposes of the Cable Television Mandatory Television Broadcast Signal Rules,  {O-  Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CS Docket No. 95178, 11 FCC Rcd 6201 (1996); 47 C.F.R. 76.55(e). the end of the second must   kcarry/retransmission consent election cycle, and by Nielsen's DMAs for all election cycles thereafter.   .Television markets for digital allocation purposes, however, are currently defined by DMAs rather than  S-  ADIs.x] {O-#X\  P6G;P#эSee 47 C.F.R. 76.624(d)(2)(ii).x Noting that digital broadcast television service in certain markets is to be introduced months   earlier than the switch to DMAs, the situation now exists where carriage obligations commence under one   <set of standards (ADIs) and shortly thereafter shift to a new set of market definitions (DMAs). This two S-  =step carriage process is likely to cause channel lineup disruptions and subscriber confusionO. ] yO -  #X\  P6G;P#эFor example, in the Denver television market, where the top four affiliates are scheduled to transition to digital   by November 1999, there are eleven counties that were not part of the Denver ADI but are part of the Denver DMA.   Copyright issues may also be implicated as a television station's signal, either analog or digital, may be considered "distant" under Section 111 of the Copyright Act if the signal is carried outside its designated local market. O We seek   [comment on this situation and the steps the Commission should take to lessen the possibility of channel lineup disruptions.  S-  Sx-O.Compliance and Enforcement "x',`(`(88"Ԍ S-  a ęU86.` ` Under current Commission rules, whenever a television station believes that a cable   operator has failed to meet its must carry obligations, the station may file a complaint with the  S-  .Commission.;] yO-ԍ47 C.F.R. 76.7.; Section 614(d)(3) requires the Commission to adjudicate a must carry complaint within  S-  120 days from the date it is filed.@X] yO-ԍ47 U.S.C. 534(d)(3).@ The Commission may grant the complaint and order the cable   operator to carry the station or it may dismiss the complaint if it is determined that the cable operator has   lfully met its must carry obligations with regard to that station. We seek comment on whether the   complaint process now set forth in Part 76 is appropriate in the context of digital broadcasting stations.   We specifically ask whether the Commission's rules need to be modified to recognize the broadcaster's   transmission of programming streams rather than entire channels. We welcome any suggestions for   streamlining the complaint process that would expedite the Commission's adjudication of the requested  Sp-action.\p] yO -  hԍWe note that we recently issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on methods to streamline  {O-  the cable television complaint rules, generally. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review, Part 76 Cable Television  {O-Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, CS Docket 9854, FCC 9868, 1998 WL 187918 (rel. Apr. 22, 1998).   SH -  S - P.XInput Selector or A/B Switch (#  S -  2V87. ` ` Various means of providing cable subscribers access to overtheair broadcast signals have   been explored in years past. One recognized option was to require cable operators to provide subscribers   with an input selector switch (commonly referred to as an A/B switch) that switches television receiver   jinputs from cable to an overtheair antenna and to require cable system operators to educate subscribers  S0-  jas to the use of this device.\0 ] {O-  Z#X\  P6G;P#эAmendment of Part 76 of the Commission's Rules Concerning Carriage of Television Broadcast Signals by   iCable Television SystemsAmendment of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules Concerning Input Selector Switches  {On-Used in Conjunction With Cable Television Service, MM Docket 85349, 4 FCC Rcd 4552 (1989). Congress, however, subsequently abolished the Commission's A/B switch   requirements when it passed the Cable Act of 1992, stating affirmatively that no cable operator should be  S-  required to provide or make available such a switch.d0 ] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 534(e).d It stated that an A/B switch is not an enduring  S-  or feasible method for the reception of television signals.E ] yO-ԍ1992 Cable Act, 2(a)(18).E In light of Section 614(b)(4)(B), and   [Congressional statements about the Commission's broad role in examining the digital broadcast television   carriage issue, we ask whether we have the authority to address A/B switch issues, notwithstanding the existing prohibition.  S-  AW88.` ` The availability of an input selector switch, in conjunction with television antennas, could   be a means of increasing cable subscriber access to DTV signals, including ancillary and supplementary  S-  ]services that are not entitled to cable carriage.P ] yO&-  ԍRules have also been adopted by the Commission which remove legal impediments to the installation of roof  {OX'-top antennas. See 47 C.F.R. 1.4000. That does not necessarily mean that a regulatory"(,`(`(88"   requirement mandating the inclusion of such a device is needed. The basic hardware involved is readily   available from retail outlets. Moreover, a switch mechanism is now incorporated into many television   jreceivers (as well as into videotape recorders and DBS receivers) and new digital television receivers may   have multiple input possibilities fully selectable from remote control devices. We seek comment on these   views and specifically ask whether A/B switches have evolved, from a technical perspective, in the last   six years. Are they easier to use than they were when Congress made its findings for the 1992 Cable Act?   For example, has widespread use of remote control technology rather than manual operation made the use   0of A/B switches more effective? Are there widely accepted industry practices with regard to the   Lmanufacturing and inclusion of A/B switches? What plans, if any, do manufacturers have to incorporate   =electronic or diodebased A/B switches into television receivers and other devices? We also ask whether   >there are any actions that the Commission needs to take to make sure that subscribers have access to   jdigital television signals that are not carried. Are there situations where regulatory intervention would be   useful either to facilitate access as a technical matter or to overcome any residual "gatekeeper" control that   cable system operators may retain with respect to such devices? Is the restriction in Section 614(b)(4)(B)   kon requirements applicable to cable operators equally applicable to requirements imposed on receiver   zmanufacturers? Could the Commission, for example, require that all digital television equipment, not   supplied by the cable operator, be manufactured with an A/B switch? We also seek comment on whether   improvements in A/B switch technology and its availability undercut the need for mandatory digital   broadcast signal carriage, if the justification for such a rule is to preserve free over the air broadcast television.  S- Q.Antennas   Sh-  X89. ` ` As the above discussion indicates, the use and usefulness of antennas, both rooftop and   /indoor, is central to this proceeding. It appears likely that antennas will play a significant role in the  S-  reception of DTV.GZ] {O-  <ԍSee DTV Refocuses Attention on Antenna Issues at CES, COMMUNICATIONS DAILY, Jan. 13, 1998 at 6   i(" 'DTV makes antennas more important than ever,' said Charles Sherman, NAB senior vpTV . . . .'We wish the whole world was still on antennas.' ")G In this context, many questions arise about the efficacy of antennas for overtheair   reception of DTV and their use by cable and noncable homes, alike. For example, do indoor antennas   work better with digital television receivers than with analog receivers? How do weather conditions affect   MDTV television reception when an antenna is used? Are roof top antennas an economically efficient   0alternative to cable for the reception of DTV signals? Should the Commission encourage antenna   ?technology in order to enhance the use of the valuable spectrum broadcasters use? How does the availability of better antennas affect the necessity of mandatory digital broadcast signal carriage rules? ` `  S-  V. IMPACT ON OTHER RULES  S-l U   S- A. X Rate Regulation (#   S8-  `Y90. ` ` Digital broadcast signal carriage also has potential consequences for the cable television   Mrate regulation process. Both jurisdictional and substantive rate level issues are involved. One of the   issues addressed in this proceeding has to do with where, in terms of tier location, digital broadcast   television signals would be placed on the cable systems involved. The answer to this question has   jurisdictional consequences for the rate regulation process and substantive consequences in terms of the   yrate levels permitted by the Commission's rules. With respect to the jurisdictional question, rates for the"p#),`(`(88$"   {basic service tier ("BST") are subject to local franchise authority regulation and upper tier or cable  S-programming service tiers ("CPST") are subject to Commission regulation on a complaint basis.] {O@-  ԍSee 47 U.S.C. 543. Cable programming service tier rate regulation ceases on March 31, 1999.  See 47 U.S.C. 543(c)(4).  S-  Z91.` ` With respect to the substance of rate regulation, under the benchmark rate rules, once   initial rates are established, cable operators are permitted to adjust their rates for changes in the number  S8-  .of regulated channels.^8"] {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эSee Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket 92266, 8 FCC Rcd 5631,  {O -  5776 (1993) ("Rate Order"); Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of  {O -Proposed Rulemaking, in MM Docket 92266, 9 FCC Rcd 4119, 420204 (1994) ("Second Reconsideration Order"). Cable operators seeking to adjust regulated rates to reflect these changes had to  S-  be prepared to justify rate increases using the applicable forms.H] {O -  ;#X\  P6G;P#эFCC Form 1210, Updating Maximum Permitted Rates for Regulated Cable Service (May 1994). See also, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(d), 76.933. In justifying rate adjustments, operators  S-  Nuse a channel adjustment methodology provided for under the rules.~] yO*-  #X\  P6G;P#эThe initial per channel adjustment methodology permitted operators to increase rates by a per channel amount   hwhen channels were added to either the basic service tier or the cable programming service tier, with the per channel  {O-  amount decreasing as the number of channels on a system increased. See 47 C.F.R.  76.922.  Operators electing   to use the "going forward" rules were allowed to take a per channel markup of up to 20 cents for each channel   added to the cable programming service tier. These rules, however, ceased to be effective on December 31, 1997.  {O-  ZSee 47 C.F.R. 76.922(g)(8) and Sixth Order on Reconsideration, Fifth Report and Order, and Seventh Notice of  {O-Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket 92266, 10 FCC Rcd 1226 (1994).  The rules also provide an  S-  kadjustment process when channels are droppedM] {OH-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.922(g)(4).M and when channels are moved between tiers.Nz] {O-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.922(g)(5). N  An   alternative "cost of service" rate regulation process also is available to cable system operators that believe  Sp-  the benchmark process fails to adequately account for their costs.Jp ] {O-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.922(i).J  There are also cost passthrough   mechanisms for defined categories of "external" costs, including franchise fees; certain local franchise   costs; programming; retransmission consent; and copyright fees. Costs associated with compliance with  S -  [mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules are not now included as external costs.J ] {O6 -ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.922(f).J  Customer equipment   that is used to receive the basic service tier, and any other service received with the same equipment, is  S -  subject to franchise authority jurisdiction under a separate set of rules.G 0] {Oz#-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.923.G  Additionally, subject to a   number of conditions, cable operators may establish a category of cable programming service tiers,   referred to as a "new product tiers," that may be offered at prices they elect. New product tiers consist   of programming not previously carried by the operator that is optional to subscribers and that is available"2*,`(`(88J"  S-  without subscribing to any other cable programming service tier.G] {Oh-ԍSee 47 C.F.R. 76.987.G  It appears that most cable system   /operators that are adding separate tiers of digital cable programming may be doing so under the "new product tier" provisions of the rules.  S`-  [92. ` ` In our effort to establish a complete record in this area, and make an informed policy   decision with regard to rate regulation, we seek comment on what, if any, changes in these rules may be   necessary or desirable. We specifically seek comment on the processes and costs of delivering digital   broadcast television to cable subscribers. This part of the inquiry is important because some operators,   such as Intermedia, have said that mandating carriage of all digital broadcast television transmissions "will  S-  financially devastate many cable operators."hZ] yO -#X\  P6G;P#эIntermedia Comments at 3.h Broadcasters acknowledge that the transition to digital will  Sp-  Lbe expensive for all parties involved."p] {O -  ,ԍSee Jon Lafayette and David Hatch, More Doubts About HDTV, ELECTRONIC MEDIA, September 15, 1997   at 45 (Martin Yudkovitz, President of Interactive Media and Business Development at NBC states: "NBC cannot   -force its affiliates, cable operators or consumers to follow its lead in digital broadcasting, which will require large investments in equipment."). We note that the broadcaster is currently required to pay for the  SH -  /costs of delivering its analog signal to the cable operator's headend.pH ] yO-  #X\  P6G;P#эTelevision stations "may be required to bear the costs associated with delivering a good quality signal or a  {O-  ybaseband video signal to the principal headend of the cable system." 47 U.S.C. 534(b)(10)(A); See 47 C.F.R.   76.60(a). The Commission has stated that such costs may be for "improved antennas, increased tower height,   microwave relay equipment, amplification equipment and tests that may be needed to determine whether the station's   signal complies with the signal strength requirements, especially if the cable system's overtheair reception  {O-equipment is already in place and is otherwise operating properly." Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 2991.p Cable subscribers also have an   interest given that rates may change if digital broadcast television stations must be carried by cable   <systems, and the Commission has a statutory responsibility to ensure reasonable rates to these subscribers.   {We also seek comment on whether existing rate levels already allow operators to recover the costs involved in any upgrading of their systems necessary for digital broadcast signal carriage.  SX-  %\93. ` ` The "costs of carriage" issue has been generally addressed in prior comments. The   lbroadcasters, for example, assert that they should not have to pay for cable upgrades in return for  S-  .mandatory carriage.UP ] {O-ԍSee Broadcaster's Reply Comments at 18.U They state that cable operators will know what technical compatibility issues lie  S-  ahead and thus, any expenses incurred to ensure compatibility should be borne by those systems.;] {Ob!-ԍId. at 1819.; The   cable operators, on the other hand, argue that if they are required to carry any digital broadcast services   before a cable system has become digitalcapable, the cost to transmit such services should be borne by  Sh-  the broadcast station.yht] {O|%-#X\  P6G;P#эSee, e.g., TCI Comments at 15.y We ask that commenters refresh the record on the specific technical modifications"h+,`(`(88"  S-  needed to enable cable systems to deliver digital broadcast television to subscribers.t] yOh-  #X\  P6G;P#эIn its comments, TCI notes that these costs could include the following: (1) equipment at the headend to   ,convert each broadcaster's digital transmission to analog; (2) equipment at the headend to demodulate the broadcast   Jmaterial and remodulate it to conform to the system's technical standards; (3) equipment at the headend to separate   the broadcaster's primary video service from other digital feeds; and (4) digital set top boxes in the consumer's home. TCI comments at 13.t We ask what the   lcosts will be for such modifications, particularly for new headend equipment and the delivery and   jinstallation of new digital set top boxes, if they are needed to comply with any carriage requirement. We   >also ask about the costs related to cable tower modifications as it may be necessary to add additional   \digital broadcast television receiving antennas at the headend. To what extent should these additional   costs be the responsibility of the broadcaster seeking carriage? We also seek comment on whether digital   cable programming services are paying, or plan to pay, cable operator digital equipment costs as one way   of obtaining carriage on the cable system. We ask if the advent of digital compression technology has, or will, lessen the cable operator's costs in bringing digital broadcast television signals into the home.  S-  Sp- B.XSubscriber Notification (#  S -  ]94. ` ` Cable operators are required to notify subscribers of any changes in rates, programming  S -  services or channel positions.g x] yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 C.F.R. 76.964(a).g When the change involves the addition or deletion of channels, each  S -  >channel added or deleted must be separately identified.X ] {Ox-#X\  P6G;P#эId.X We seek comment on how any new digital   kbroadcast television carriage requirements will affect the notification provisions described above. For   example, if an existing broadcaster switches to an HDTV format, would the cable operator be required   to notify subscribers of the change? Moreover, if a television broadcasts multiple streams of   programming, must the cable operator explain the broadcaster's offerings on each of these streams? We   jtentatively conclude that a cable operator would be required to notify subscribers whenever a new digital   television transmission is added to the operator's channel lineup because these digital broadcast television   ysubstitutions could be considered new services affecting subscribers equipment and subscription choices.   LWe also tentatively conclude that while the operator should state that multiple programming streams are   available, it would be under no obligation to explain to subscribers the material found in each and every   SDTV programming stream, if such material is carried, as such detail is not required by either the Act or our rules.  S- ` `  S- C.XProgram Exclusivity and Significant Viewing (#  Sx-  a^95. ` ` The Commission's program exclusivity rules, as implemented in Sections 76.92 and   O76.151, protect exclusive distribution rights afforded to network programming and syndicated   programming. Television broadcast station licensees are entitled to protect those kinds of programs for   which they have contracted in a particular market by exercising blackout rights against distant television   broadcast stations carried on cable systems that serve more than 1000 subscribers. Stations may assert their rights regardless of whether their signals are carried on the cable system in question. ",,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  _96. ` ` We seek comment on how the transition to digital television may affect these rules. We   specifically ask how SDTV multiplexing impacts these rules and whether the cable operator will be able   to accommodate such blackout requests on various programming streams. Finally, we ask whether these   rules are applicable in the digital age, with or without must carry, and whether it would be possible to   =repeal these rules and instead rely on the retransmission consent provisions of Section 325 of the Act to   zprotect the rights in question. Section 325 generally provides that distant stations may not be carried   without the permission of the station involved. To the extent digital broadcast television stations will need   jto make new arrangements for programming, it may be possible for the rights now protected by the rules   to be protected through private contractual relationships. A broadcaster, for example, could require a cable   \operator to blackout certain programming and monetary penalties could arise if the operator does not   comply with the terms of the contract. This may be a more effective method of enforcing blackout rights   than relying on the Commission's current complaint process. The rules in question, we note, were adopted prior to the changes in Section 325 that include the retransmission consent requirement.  S -  2 `97.` ` The Commission's cable television broadcast signals carriage rules and the copyright laws,   through reference to the Commission's rules, contain a number of distinctions in their application based  S -  on whether a broadcast signal is "local" to the cable community.|X ] yO-  ԍSome of these rules, for example, make use of economic (Arbitron ADI or Nielsen DMA) markets to define   what is local. Other rules define "local" in technical terms making using of the predicted service areas of stations which are dependent on a station's power, antenna height, and the terrain in the area. | One measure of whether a station's   \signal is "local" involves using actual overtheair viewership in the community as the standard. This  S0-  "significantly viewed" concept is defined in Section 76.5(i) of the rulesO 0] yO-  <#X\  P6G;P#эA significantly viewed station is defined as one that is viewed "in other than cable television households as   follows: (1) For a full or partial network stationa share of viewing hours of at least 3 percent (total week hours),   and a net weekly circulation of at least 25 percent; and (2) for an independent stationa share of viewing hours of at least 2 percent (total week hours) and a net weekly circulation of at least 5 percent." 47 C.F.R. 76.5(i).O and is applied in the contexts  S-  of syndicated exclusivity, sports broadcast,] yOx-  ԍ 47 C.F.R. 76.67. The application of this rule to cause the deletion of certain sports events carried beyond the Grade B contour of the station broadcasting the event is through reference to Section 76.5(gg) of the rules. network nonduplication, and, through incorporation by  S-  reference, to the compulsory copyright licensing process.:( ] yO-ԍ17 U.S.C. 111.: The significant viewing standard supplements   Lthe other "local" station definitions by permitting stations to be considered local both within their Grade   B contours and outside of their Grade B contours and outside of their ADI or DMAdefined economic   jmarket areas based on viewing surveys that directly demonstrate that overtheair viewers have access to the signals in question.  S-  Da98. ` ` Because digital broadcast television stations will not, in the early stages of their   ydeployment, have significant overtheair audience, we seek comment on methods to address the kinds of   issues that the significant viewing standard addresses in the analog environment. Should, for example,   \a new measure be developed that measures viewing in places that are equipped with digital receivers?   Or should the "significant viewing" status of analog stations be transferred to their digital replacements.   It is our initial view that such transfer of rights may be the most efficient and equitable way to proceed based on the costs and problems associated with taking new measurements. "- ,`(`(88\"Ԍ S-  S- D.Cable Television Relay Service  S-  b99.` ` We recognize that cable operators are frequently dependent on cable television relay  S`-  service ("CARS") stations to relay broadcast television signals.x`] {O-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#See 47 C.F.R. 78 et. seq.x CARS stations distribute signals to  S8-  microwave hubs where it may be physically impossible or too expensive to run actual cable wire.x8Z] yO2-  ԍ#X\  P6G;P#In many instances, a cable operator may not be able to string physical cable plant due to geographical   restrictions such as rivers, mountains or superhighways or due to other restrictions, such as the inability or the   expense of laying underground cable. Under such circumstances, the cable operator may be able to use CARS band   wmicrowave for pointtopoint and pointtomultipoint locations to intraconnect the cable system. For example, a   cable system may run cable up to a CARS transmitter site, convert all the radio frequency (RF) channels to   microwave frequencies for transmission, receive the microwave at a receive location, downconvert back to the RF  yO -channels and complete delivery of the channels via physical wiring to the subscribers. #Xj\  P6G;9XP#   >CARS stations are not used to distribute programming directly to subscribers. We seek comment on  S-whether the introduction of digital broadcast television impacts CARS, and, if so, how.] yO"-  ԍ#X\  P6G;P#CARS frequency congestion would likely to be more acute in urban and suburban areas because these areas   currently have the most broadcast TV stations and these urban stations would likely to convert to digital transmissions   at an earlier date. As CARS spectrum becomes congested, the cost to squeeze in additional CARS channels will   become more and more expensive. In some instances, where CARS channels may cross into another CARS  yOB-frequency band, i.e., 18 GHz, at least two new CARS systems would be required.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#  S-  S-` ` hh, VI. PROCEDURAL MATTERS  SH -  Bc100. ` `  Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis. The requirements proposed in this Notice   have been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the "1995 Act") and would   impose new and modified information collection requirements on the public. The Commission, as part   of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public to take this opportunity   yto comment on the proposed information collection requirements contained in this Notice, as required by   the 1995 Act. Public comments are due 60 days from date of publication of this Notice in the Federal   Register. Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for   the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information would have   jpractical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality,   .utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of   information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.  SB-  nd101. ` ` Written comments by the public on the proposed new and modified information collection   requirements are due 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice in the Federal Register.   .Comments should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission, Room 234, 1919   M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov. For additional   information on the proposed information collection requirements, contact Judy Boley at 2024180214 or via the Internet at the above address. "R.J ,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  ~e102. ` ` Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis. The regulatory flexibility analysis is found in Appendix A, attached.  S-  f103.` `  Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding will be treated as a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding   subject to the "permit-but-disclose" requirements under Section 1.1206(b) of the rules. 47 C.F.R.    1.1206(b), as revised. Ex parte presentations are permissible if disclosed in accordance with Commission   Lrules, except during the Sunshine Agenda period when presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are generally   prohibited. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that a memorandum summarizing   a presentation must contain a summary of the substance of the presentation and not merely a listing of the   subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and arguments presented  St-  is generally required. See 47 C.F.R.  1.1206(b)(2), as revised. Additional rules pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Section 1.1206(b).  S& -  S -  g104. ` ` Filing of Comments and Reply Comments. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in   zSections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.415 and 1.419, interested parties  S -  may file comments on or before September 17, 1998 and reply comments on or before October 30, 1998 .   To file formally in this proceeding, you must file an original plus four copies of all comments and reply   comments. If you want each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments and reply   comments, you must file an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply comments   to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.   z20554. Comments and reply comments will be available for public inspection during regular business   hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street   N.W., Washington D.C. 20554. The Cable Services Bureau contact for this proceeding is Ben Golant at 2024187111 or bgolant@fcc.gov.  S -  h105. ` ` Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB")   on the proposed and/or modified information collections on or before 60 days after date of publication   in the Federal Register. In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on   the information collections contained herein should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal Communications   mCommission, Room 234, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to   jboley@fcc.gov and to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to fain_t@al.eop.gov.  S-  %i106. ` ` Parties are also asked to submit comments and reply comments on diskette, where   possible. Such diskette submissions would be in addition to, and not a substitute for, the formal filing   requirements addressed above. Parties submitting diskettes should submit them to Ben Golant of the   Cable Services Bureau, 2033 M Street N.W., Room 703B, Washington, D.C. 20554. Such a submission   ^should be on a 3.5 inch diskette formatted in an IBM compatible form using MS DOS 5.0 and   WordPerfect 5.1 software. The diskette should be submitted in "read only" mode. The diskette should   be clearly labelled with the party's name, proceeding, type of pleading (comments or reply comments), and date of submission. The diskette should be accompanied by a cover letter.   Sx#-  X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:614, and 615 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i) and (j), 325,  S*%-  336, 534, and 535, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of proposed amendments to Part 76, in accordance  S&-  with the proposals, discussions and statements of issues in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and that  S&- COMMENT IS SOUGHT regarding such proposals, discussions and statements of issues."&/,`(`(88n("Ԍ S-  "ԙk108. ` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Office of Public Affairs, Reference   Operations Division, 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. ` `  hh,FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  ` `  hh,Magalie Roman Salas ` `  hh,Secretary X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:-ԍSee id.5   S -  32. ` `  Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rule Changes. This Notice seeks comment   on several issues relating to the carriage of digital television broadcast stations. The objective of the   Notice is to propose broadcast signal carriage policy alternatives during the transition period, examine the   changes in the Commission's current broadcast signal carriage rules that may be necessary in the digital age, and to ensure compatibility between digital broadcast television, cable systems, and related equipment.  S-  3. ` `  Legal Basis. The authority for the action proposed in this rulemaking is contained in   Sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 325, 336, 614, and 615 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (j), 325, 336, 534, and 535.  SF-  34. ` `  Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities Impacted. The IRFA directs   the Commission to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small  S-  jentities that will be affected by the proposed rules.g yO-#X\  P6G;P#э5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3). g The IRFA defines the term "small entity" as having   the same meaning as the terms "small business," "small organization," and "small business concern" under  S-  >Section 3 of the Small Business Act.c yO!-#X\  P6G;P#э5 U.S.C. 601(3).c Under the Small Business Act, a small business concern is one   {which: (1)is independently owned and operated; (2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and  SX-  (3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration ("SBA").aX.  yO&%-#X\  P6G;P#э15 U.S.C. 632.a The rules   .we propose in this Notice will affect cable operators, OVS operators, cable programmers, and television station licensees."1 ,`(`(88z"Ԍ S-  ԙ5. ` ` Small MVPDs: SBA has developed a definition of small entities for cable and other pay  S-  television services, which includes all such companies generating $11 million or less in annual receipts.p yOB-#X\  P6G;P#э13 C.F.R. 121.201 (SIC 4841).p   This definition includes cable system operators, closed circuit television services, direct broadcast satellite   services, multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems and subscription television   zservices. According to the Census Bureau data from 1992, there were 1,758 total cable and other pay  S:-  television services and 1,423 had less than $11 million in revenue.:X yO2-  #X\  P6G;P#эU.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Industry and Enterprise Receipts Size report, Table 2D, SIC 4841 (Bureau of the Census data under contract to the Office of Advocacy of the SBA). We address below each service individually to provide a more precise estimate of small entities.  S-  _6. ` ` Cable Systems: The Commission has developed, with SBA's approval, our own definition   zof a small cable system operator for the purposes of rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a  St-  "small cable company" is one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide. \t yO-  ;#X\  P6G;P#э47 C.F.R. 76.901(e). The Commission developed this definition based on its determinations that a small cable  {O-  system operator is one with annual revenues of $100 million or less. Sixth Report and Order and Eleventh Order  {OV-on Reconsideration, MM Docket Nos. 92266 and 93215, 10 FCC Rcd 7393 (1995).  Based on our most   !recent information, we estimate that there were 1439 cable operators that qualified as small cable  S$ -  companies at the end of 1995. $  {O-#X\  P6G;P#эPaul Kagan Associates, Inc., Cable TV Investor, Feb. 29, 1996 (based on figures for Dec. 30, 1995). Since then, some of those companies may have grown to serve over   y400,000 subscribers, and others may have been involved in transactions that caused them to be combined   =with other cable operators. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 1439 small entity cable system operators that may be affected by the decisions and rules proposed in this Notice.  S\-  7. ` ` The Communications Act also contains a definition of a small cable system operator,   which is "a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1% of   zall subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual  S-  0revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000."g f  yO-#X\  P6G;P#э47 U.S.C. 543(m)(2).g The Commission has determined that there are   61,700,000 subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an operator serving fewer than 617,000   jsubscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual  Sl-  /revenues of all of its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate.h l  yO -#X\  P6G;P#э47 C.F.R. 76.1403(b).h Based on available data,  SD-  we find that the number of cable operators serving 617,000 subscribers or less totals approximately 1450. D  {Oj"-#X\  P6G;P#эPaul Kagan Associates, Inc., Cable TV Investor, Feb. 29, 1996 (based on figures for Dec. 30, 1995).   Although it seems certain that some of these cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross   annual revenues exceed $250,000,000, we are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the   =number of cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the definition in the Communications Act. "|2 ,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  ~8.` ` Open Video System ("OVS"): The Commission has certified eleven OVS operators. Of   these eleven, only two are providing service. Bell Atlantic received approval for its certification to  S-  convert its Dover, New Jersey Video Dialtone ("VDT") system to OVS.  {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эBell AtlanticNew Jersey, Inc. (Certification to Operate an Open Video System), 11 FCC Rcd 13249 (CSB  {O-1996) ("Bell Atlantic OVS Certification").  Affiliates of Residential   <Communications Network, Inc. ("RCN") received approval to operate OVS systems in New York City and   jthe Boston area. Bell Atlantic and RCN have sufficient revenues to assure us that they do not qualify as   small business entities. Little financial information is available for the other entities authorized to provide   OVS that are not yet operational. We believe that one OVS licensee may qualify as a small business   concern. Given that other entities have been authorized to provide OVS service but have not yet begun to generate revenues, we conclude that at least some of the OVS operators qualify as small entities.  Sr-  ~9. ` ` Program Producers and Distributors. The Commission has not developed a definition   of small entities applicable to producers or distributors of cable television programs. Therefore, we will  S$ -  .use the SBA classifications of Motion Picture and Video Tape Production (SIC 7812),$ $ yO-  #X\  P6G;P#э"Establishments primarily engaged in the production of theatrical and nontheatrical motion pictures and video   tapes for exhibition or sale, including educational, industrial, and religious films. Included in the industry are   establishments engaged in both production and distribution. Producers of live radio and television programs are   ,classified in Industry 7922." Standard Industrial Classification Manual, SIC 7812, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget (1987) (OMB SIC Manual).  Motion Picture  S -  and Video Tape Distribution (SIC 7822),-X  yOp-  Zԍ"Establishments primarily engaged in the distribution (rental or sale) of theatrical and nontheatrical motion   <picture films or in the distribution of video tapes and disks, except to the general public." OMB SIC Manual, SIC 7822.- and Theatrical Producers (Except Motion Pictures) and  S -  yMiscellaneous Theatrical Services (SIC 7922).ZX  yOh-  #X\  P6G;P#э"Establishments primarily engaged in providing live theatrical presentations, such as road companies and   Lsummer theaters. . . . Also included in this industry are producers of . . . live television programs." OMB SIC Manual, SIC 7922.Z These SBA definitions provide that a small entity in the   cable television programming industry is an entity with $21.5 million or less in annual receipts for SIC  S -  L7812 and SIC 7822, and $5 million or less in annual receipts for SIC 7922.  yO8-#X\  P6G;P#э13 C.F.R. 121.201.#x6X@`7 iX@#ь Census Bureau data indicate   >the following: (a) there were 7,265 firms in the United States classified as Motion Picture and Video   Production (SIC 7812), and that 6,987 of these firms had $16.999 million or less in annual receipts and  S -  L7,002 of these firms had $24.999 million or less in annual receipts;/  yOP!-  #X\  P6G;P#эU.S. Small Business Administration 1992 Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Report, Table 2D, SIC   7812, (U.S. Bureau of the Census data adapted by the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business   YAdministration) ("SBA 1992 Census Report"). Because the Census data do not include a category for $21.5 million,   we have reported the closest increment below and above the $21.5 million threshold. There is a difference of 15   firms between the $16,999 and $24,999 million annual receipt categories. It is possible that these 15 firms could have annual receipts of $21.5 million or less and would therefore be classified as small businesses./ (b) there were 1,139 firms classified   [as Motion Picture and Video Tape Distribution (SIC 7822), and 1007 of these firms had $16.999 million   or less in annual receipts and 1013 of these firms had $24.999 million or less in annual receipts; and (c)"3,`(`(88"   there were 5,671 firms in the United States classified as Theatrical Producers and Services (SIC 7922),  S-and 5627 of these firms had $4.999 million or less in annual receipts.p yO@-#X\  P6G;P#эSBA 1992 Census Report, SIC 7922.p  S-  10. ` ` Each of these SIC categories is very broad and includes firms that may be engaged in   various industries, including cable programming. Specific figures are not available regarding how many   of these firms exclusively produce and/or distribute programming for cable television or how many are   independently owned and operated. Thus, we estimate that our rules may affect approximately 6,987   ysmall entities primarily engaged in the production and distribution of taped cable television programs and 5,627 small producers of live programs that may be affected by the rules adopted in this proceeding.   Sp-  A11. ` ` Television Stations. The proposed rules and policies will apply to television broadcasting   licensees, and potential licensees of television service. The Small Business Administration defines a  S" -  television broadcasting station that has no more than $10.5 million in annual receipts as a small business." X yO-#X\  P6G;P#э13 C.F.R. 121.201, Standard Industrial Code (SIC) 4833 (1996).   Television broadcasting stations consist of establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting visual  S -  programs by television to the public, except cable and other pay television services.p  yOZ-  Z#X\  P6G;P#эEconomics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992 CENSUS OF  yO"-TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND UTILITIES, ESTABLISHMENT AND FIRM SIZE, Series UC92S1, Appendix A9 (1995).p Included in this  S -  industry are commercial, religious, educational, and other television stations.z @ {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эId. See also OMB SIC Manual at 283, which describes "Television Broadcasting Stations (SIC Code 4833) as:  XEstablishments primarily engaged in broadcasting visual programs by television to the public,  mexcept cable and other pay television services. Included in this industry are commercial, religious,  meducational and other television stations. Also included here are establishments primarily engaged in television broadcasting and which produce taped television program materials. Ƥ Also included are   =establishments primarily engaged in television broadcasting and which produce taped television program  SZ-  materials.vZ  yO|-  Z#X\  P6G;P#эEconomics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992 CENSUS OF  yOD-TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND UTILITIES, ESTABLISHMENT AND FIRM SIZE, Series UC92S1, Appendix A9 (1995).v Separate establishments primarily engaged in producing taped television program materials  S2-  are classified under another SIC number.2 {O-  J#X\  P6G;P#эId. SIC 7812 (Motion Picture and Video Tape Production); SIC 7922 (Theatrical Producers and Miscellaneous Theatrical Services (producers of live radio and television programs).  There were 1,509 television stations operating in the nation  S -  in 1992.y 4 yO"-#X\  P6G;P#эFCC News Release No. 31327, Jan. 13, 1993.y That number has remained fairly constant as indicated by the approximately 1,579 operating  S-  ?full power television broadcasting stations in the nation as of May 31, 1998. {OF%-#X\  P6G;P#эSee Broadcast Station Totals As Of May 31, 1998, FCC News Release, June 19, 1998. In addition, as of "4V,`(`(88"  S-  LOctober31, 1997 , there were 1,880 LPTV stations that may also be affected by our rules. yOh-#X\  P6G;P#эGiven the nature of LPTV stations, we will presume that all LPTVs qualify as small entities. For 1992NX {O-  #X\  P6G;P#эCensus for Communications' establishments are performed every five years ending with a "2" or "7". See  {O-Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, supra note 78, III.N   the $xC   $xC number of television stations that produced less than $10.0 million in revenue was 1,155  S-establishments.X yO-  #X\  P6G;P#эThe amount of $10 million was used to estimate the number of small business establishments because the   relevant Census categories stopped at $9,999,999 and began at $10,000,000. No category for $10.5 million existed. Thus, the number is as accurate as it is possible to calculate with the available information.  S`-  #12. ` ` Thus, the proposed rules will affect many of the approximately 1,574 television stations;  S8-  yapproximately 1,200 of those stations are considered small businesses."8 yO -  #X\  P6G;P#эWe use the 77 percent figure of TV stations operating at less than $10 million for 1992 and apply it to the 1998 total of 1569 TV stations to arrive at 1,200 stations categorized as small businesses." These estimates may overstate   jthe number of small entities since the revenue figures on which they are based do not include or aggregate revenues from nontelevision affiliated companies.  S-  13. ` ` In addition to owners of operating television stations, any entity who seeks or desires to   obtain a television broadcast license may be affected by the proposals contained in this item. The number   of entities that may seek to obtain a television broadcast license is unknown. We invite comment as to such number.  S -  14.` ` Small Manufacturers: The SBA has developed definitions of small entity for manufacturers   Nof household audio and video equipment (SIC 3651) and for radio and television broadcasting and   communications equipment (SIC 3663). In each case, the definition includes all such companies   employing 750 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data indicates that there are 858 U.S. firms that   manufacture radio and television broadcasting and communications equipment, and that 778 of these firms  S -have fewer than 750 employees and would be classified as small entities.  ,  {O-  ԍU.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1992 Census of Transportation, Communications and Utilities, Table 1D, (issued May 1995), SIC category 3663.  S-  B15.` ` Electronic Equipment Manufacturers: The Commission has not developed a definition   of small entities applicable to manufacturers of electronic equipment. Therefore, we will use the SBA  Sl-  Mdefinition of manufacturers of Radio and Television Broadcasting and Communications Equipment.!l  yO!-  iԍThis category excludes establishments primarily engaged in the manufacturing of household audio and visual  {OZ"-equipment which is categorized as SIC 3651. See infra for SIC 3651 data.   According to the SBA's regulations, a TV equipment manufacturer must have 750 or fewer employees  S-  in order to qualify as a small business concern.M" yO%-ԍ13 C.F.R. 121.201, SIC Code 3663.M The Census Bureau category is very broad, and specific   figures are not available as to how many of these firms are exclusive manufacturers of television"5p",`(`(884"   equipment or how many are independently owned and operated. We conclude that there are approximately 778 small manufacturers of radio and television equipment.  S-  416.` ` Electronic Household/Consumer Equipment: The Commission has not developed a   definition of small entities applicable to manufacturers of electronic equipment used by consumers, as   compared to industrial use by television licensees and related businesses. Therefore, we will use the SBA  S-  /definition applicable to manufacturers of Household Audio and Visual Equipment. According to the   0SBA's regulations, a household audio and visual equipment manufacturer must have 750 or fewer  S-  .employees in order to qualify as a small business concern.M# yO* -ԍ13 C.F.R. 121.201, SIC Code 3651.M Census Bureau data indicates that there are   410 U.S. firms that manufacture radio and television broadcasting and communications equipment, and  Sr-  that 386 of these firms have fewer than 500 employees and would be classified as small entities. $rX yOj -  ԍU.S. Small Business Administration 1995 Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Report, Table 3, SIC Code 3651, (Bureau of the Census data adapted by the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration).  The   remaining 24 firms have 500 or more employees; however, we are unable to determine how many of those   khave fewer than 750 employees and therefore, also qualify as small entities under the SBA definition.   Furthermore, the Census Bureau category is very broad, and specific figures are not available as to how   [many of these firms are exclusive manufacturers of television equipment for consumers or how many are   .independently owned and operated. We conclude that there are approximately 386 small manufacturers of television equipment for consumer/household use.  S2-  17.` ` Computer Manufacturers: The Commission has not developed a definition of small   entities applicable to computer manufacturers. Therefore, we will utilize the SBA definition of Electronic   Computers. According to SBA regulations, a computer manufacturer must have 1,000 or fewer employees  S-  in order to qualify as a small entity.M% yO -ԍ13 C.F.R. 121.201, SIC Code 3571.M Census Bureau data indicates that there are 716 firms that   [manufacture electronic computers and of those, 659 have fewer than 500 employees and qualify as small  Sl-  kentities. &l@ yOL-  ԍU.S. Small Business Administration 1995 Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Report, Table 3, SIC Code 3571, (Bureau of the Census data adapted by the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration).  The remaining 57 firms have 500 or more employees; however, we are unable to determine   how many of those have fewer than 1,000 employees and therefore also qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. We conclude that there are approximately 659 small computer manufacturers.  S-  o18. ` ` Compliance Requirements  . There may be compliance requirements for cable operators   and OVS operators, in the form of mandatory digital broadcast television carriage requirements, if any   of the options set forth in this Notice are ultimately adopted by the Commission. An attempt has been   [made to streamline compliance requirements. For example, we have sought comment on streamlining the must carry complaint process for digital television station carriage.  S-  o19. ` ` Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the Commission's Proposals. None. "6&,`(`(88"Ԍ S-  20. ` ` Report to Congress.  The Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including this IRFA,   in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act  S-  /of 1996.L' {O-ԍSee 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).L In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including IRFA, to  X the Chief  S-  Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of the Notice and IRFA (or  Sb-summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.F(bZ {O\-ԍSee 5 U.S.C. 604(b).F