60350 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 418–0432. For detailed instructions for Order. First, we seek further comment FR 67249, November 9, 2000). submitting comments and additional on issues related to exceptions to and information on the rulemaking process, waivers of the local simulcasting List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION requirement. Second, we seek comment Environmental protection, Air section of this document. on whether we should let full power pollution control, Incorporation by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For broadcasters use channels in the reference, Intergovernmental relations, additional information, contact Evan television broadcast band that are Volatile organic compounds, Particulate Baranoff, [email protected], of the vacant to facilitate the transition to 3.0. matter. Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) Finally, we tentatively conclude that Dated: December 5, 2017. 418–7142, or Matthew Hussey, local simulcasting should not change Alexis Strauss, [email protected], of the Office the significantly viewed status of a Next Gen TV station. Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. of Engineering and Technology, (202) [FR Doc. 2017–27432 Filed 12–19–17; 8:45 am] 418–3619. Direct press inquiries to B. Discussion BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Janice Wise at (202) 418–8165. For additional information concerning the 1. Local Simulcasting Waivers and Paperwork Reduction Act information Exceptions FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS collection requirements contained in 2. Simulcast Waivers. In the Report COMMISSION this document, send an email to PRA@ and Order, we explain that we will fcc.gov or contact Cathy Williams at consider requests for waiver of our local 47 CFR Parts 15, 73, 74 and 76 (202) 418–2918. simulcasting requirement on a case-by- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a case basis, including (1) requests [GN Docket No. 16–142; FCC 17–158] summary of the Commission’s Further seeking to transition directly from 1.0 to 3.0 service on the station’s existing Authorizing Permissive Use of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking facility without simulcasting in 1.0 and ‘‘Next Generation’’ Broadcast (FNPRM), FCC 17–158, adopted on (2) requests to air a 1.0 simulcast Television Standard November 16, 2017 and released on November 20, 2017. The full text of this channel from a host location that does AGENCY: Federal Communications document is available electronically via not cover all or a portion of the station’s Commission. the FCC’s Electronic Document community of license or from which the ACTION: Proposed rule. Management System (EDOCS) website station can provide only a lower signal at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ threshold over the community than that SUMMARY: In this document, we seek or via the FCC’s Electronic Comment required by the rules.1 With respect to further comment on issues related to Filing System (ECFS) website at http:// such requests, we state: ‘‘We are exceptions to and waivers of the local fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. (Documents will inclined to consider favorably requests simulcasting requirement, whether we be available electronically in ASCII, for waiver of our local simulcasting should let full power broadcasters use Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) requirement where the Next Gen TV channels in the television broadcast This document is also available for station can demonstrate that it has no band that are vacant to facilitate the public inspection and copying during viable local simulcasting partner in its transition to 3.0, and finally, we regular business hours in the FCC market and where the station agrees to tentatively conclude that local Reference Information Center, which is make reasonable efforts to preserve 1.0 simulcasting should not change the located in Room CY–A257 at FCC service to existing viewers in its significantly viewed status of a Next Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW, community of license and/or otherwise Gen TV station. Washington, DC 20554. The Reference minimize the impact on such viewers DATES: Comments are due on or before Information Center is open to the public (for example, by providing free or low February 20, 2018; reply comments are Monday through Thursday from 8:00 cost ATSC 3.0 converters to viewers).’’ due on or before March 20, 2018. a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday from 8:00 3. We seek comment on what further ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, a.m. to 11:30 a.m. The complete text guidance we should provide about the identified by GN Docket No. 16–142, by may be purchased from the circumstances in which we will grant a any of the following methods: Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th waiver of the local simulcasting • Federal Communications Street SW, Room CY–B402, Washington, requirement. How should we determine Commission’s website: http:// DC 20554. Alternative formats are if a station has a ‘‘viable’’ simulcast www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the available for people with disabilities partner? Given that we specify in the instructions for submitting comments. (Braille, large print, electronic files, Report and Order that a Next Gen TV • Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or audio format), by sending an email to broadcaster’s 1.0 simulcast channel messenger delivery, by commercial [email protected] or calling the must continue to cover its entire overnight courier, or by first-class or Commission’s Consumer and community of license, should we overnight U.S. Postal Service mail Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) consider a station to have no viable (although the Commission continues to 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 partner only if there is no potential experience delays in receiving U.S. (TTY). simulcasting partner in the same DMA Postal Service mail). All filings must be that can cover the station’s entire addressed to the Commission’s Synopsis community of license? Alternatively, Secretary, Office of the Secretary, I. Further Notice of Proposed should we consider adopting a broader Federal Communications Commission. Rulemaking definition of viability? For example, • People With Disabilities: Contact should we specify that waiver the FCC to request reasonable A. Introduction accommodations (accessible format 1. In this Further Notice of Proposed 1 The Commission may waive its rules if good cause is shown. See 47 CFR 1.3. We explain in the documents, sign language interpreters, Rulemaking, we seek further comment Report and Order that we are not inclined to CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] on three topics related to the rules consider favorably requests to change community of or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) adopted in the companion Report and license solely to enable simulcasting.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules 60351

applicants located in DMAs in which minimize disruption to consumers that channel to which a displaced LPTV or there are fewer than a threshold number we should consider or require? We also translator station could relocate. The of full power and/or Class A or LPTV invite comment on other circumstances LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition broadcasters will be considered to have in which we should consider granting opposes ONE Media’s proposal on the no viable partner? If so, what threshold waivers of the local simulcasting ground that it would diminish LPTV should we adopt? How should we requirement. licensing rights in the middle of the consider cases in which there are no 5. Simulcast Exceptions. We also seek displacement process. The Wi-Fi stations that can cover a station’s comment on whether to exempt NCE Alliance, Microsoft, the Consumers community of license, and therefore and/or Class A stations as a class from Union et al., and Dynamic Spectrum serve as an ATSC 1.0 simulcast host our local simulcasting requirement or Alliance also oppose any approach that under our rules, but there are stations in adopt a presumptive waiver standard for would expand broadcasters’ spectrum the DMA that are transitioning to ATSC such stations. In the Report and Order, rights in conjunction with ATSC 3.0 3.0 and therefore could potentially serve we exempt LPTV and TV translator deployment, and they express concern as a 3.0 lighthouse? If there is a stations from our local simulcasting about damaging the potential success of potential partner in the same DMA, are requirement and allow these stations to white space use in the television bands. there other circumstances that would transition directly to 3.0 service. Class A 7. Given the diversity of comments on make such potential partner not viable, and NCE stations could also face more this issue, we seek additional comment such as, for example, if the potential difficulty than commercial full power on the extent to which we should allow partner refused to agree to being a stations face when seeking a local full power broadcasters to use vacant simulcasting partner? Should we have simulcasting partner. Could allowing channels in the television broadcast different levels of scrutiny for waiver Class A and NCE stations to transition band to facilitate the transition to 3.0, requests depending on whether the directly to 3.0 make them more and, if so, when they should be able to petition seeks to transition directly as attractive ‘‘lighthouse’’ candidates? We use these channels, and what opposed to simulcast from a facility that seek comment on whether, as a general procedures we should use to authorize will not cover its community of license? matter, allowing NCE and Class A that use. As a threshold matter, how For stations that seek to simulcast from stations to transition directly would should we define a ‘‘vacant’’ channel for a facility that will not cover its serve the public interest. Under what this purpose? We seek specific comment community of license, should a factor be circumstances would direct transitions on ONE Media’s proposal, and how it how far the host location is from the be appropriate? What effect would this potentially would affect the post- petitioner’s community of license? Are have on consumers and on MVPDs? incentive auction transition/repacking there special circumstances we should What criteria distinguish these stations process and the various other users in consider for NCE stations, including from full power commercial the repacked television band.3 That is, those that are in isolated areas or are not broadcasters to justify disparate given that vacant channels might be centrally located in DMAs? 2 We seek treatment? needed by stations transitioning to new comment on the same issues for Class A 2. Temporary Use of Vacant Channels channel assignments, how does ONE stations if they cannot find a host that Media’s proposal impact that and the 6. In the Next Gen TV NPRM, we allows them to satisfy the simulcasting post-auction process in general? For asked whether we should ‘‘consider requirements in the Report and Order. example, if we allow usage of vacant allowing broadcasters [that wish to We also seek comment on the potential channels, should we only allow impact that any definition of viability deploy ATSC 3.0 service] to use vacant in-band channels remaining in the temporary access to a vacant channel would have on local viewers. after the repacking process is 4. In addition, we seek comment on market after the incentive auction repack to serve as temporary host completed? Or, should we permit such what type of ‘‘reasonable efforts’’ we access after the LPTV displacement should require a waiver applicant to facilities for ATSC 1.0 or 3.0 programming by multiple broadcasters.’’ window is closed? undertake in order to preserve 1.0 8. If we were to permit full power ONE Media requests that in markets service to existing viewers in its licensees priority to use vacant channels community of license and/or otherwise with vacant channels, the Commission should allow full power broadcasters to as dedicated transition channels, we minimize the impact on viewers in its seek comment on the process for doing coverage area. Should it be favorable to use the vacant channels as ‘‘dedicated transition channels to ensure maximum so. Specifically, how would our determination if waiver applicants broadcasters apply for an authorization volunteer to provide free or low cost continuity of service, just as it did during the transition from analog to to use a vacant channel? Should the ATSC 3.0 converters to viewers in their request be for Special Temporary coverage area? Should we require such digital.’’ It suggests that these vacant channels should be made available Authority (STA)? Should we instead a commitment as a condition for consider a request for a temporary waiver? Are there other efforts to during the post-auction transition period, and that only after the full channel to be a minor change of the station’s existing license and require a 2 Several commenters express concern that some power broadcaster has vacated the broadcasters would not be able to satisfy a local channel should the channel be made minor change application? If we treat simulcasting requirement because of the lack of available to others, such as displaced these requests as minor changes, should availability of potential simulcasting partners. For LPTV and translator license applicants. we process such requests on a first- example, PBS states that ‘‘[p]ublic stations may be come, first-served basis? Should we unable to share facilities with another station, ONE Media asserts that as primary users particularly in rural and isolated communities, in the television band, full power 3 because they are often not centrally located in a licensees have priority to obtain licenses In the Incentive Auction R&O, the Commission television market. . . .’’ PBS further explains that provided for a 39-month post-incentive auction this is because ‘‘noncommercial educational must- for vacant channels over any LPTV and transition pertaining to the various secondary carry rights are not tied to Designated Market Areas, translator licensees, and therefore full broadcast and unlicensed operations in the TV so such stations are not necessarily sited near their power licensees should be able to use bands—including LPTV and TV translator stations, commercial counterparts, and given that 16 states such a channel as a transition channel broadcast auxiliary service, wireless microphones, are covered by statewide public television networks and unlicensed white space devices—with the goal that are designed to serve their entire state during the voluntary ATSC 3.0 of promoting a smooth and effective transition regardless of DMA boundaries.’’ deployment period, even if it is the only process.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS 60352 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules

open a window for such requests? How to avoid confusion while we consider 11. We recognize that broadcasters should we resolve competing requests this issue.6 would not soon be able to demonstrate for temporary channels? What should 10. Stations that vary their signal ‘‘significant viewing’’ with their 3.0 we require a broadcaster to show to strength or change their location as a signals, but expect they will eventually demonstrate that it needs a temporary result of moving their 1.0 signal to be able to do so once Next Gen TV channel, and how long should the simulcast raise the question of how this service takes hold in the marketplace. In authorization last? What effect would change may affect their status as the meantime, we tentatively conclude this proposal have on other users in the ‘‘significantly viewed’’ in certain that maintaining the status quo with repacked band, including wireless communities or counties under respect to eligibility for significantly microphone users and white space §§ 76.5(i) and 76.54 of our rules. viewed carriage would avoid some device operations? 4 We also seek input Significantly viewed status allows the complications and disruptions to cable on how we should address MVPD significantly viewed station (1) to be and satellite television viewers who carriage issues related to usage of vacant carried by a satellite carrier in such have come to rely on such signals, while community in the other market; 7 (2) to channels. How would the Commission not imposing added mandatory carriage be carried in such community by cable handle loss of service when the full burdens on MVPDs.10 We likewise and satellite operators at the reduced power broadcaster ceases its temporary tentatively conclude that expansion of copyright payment applicable to local operation—and moves back to its eligibility for significantly viewed (in-market) stations; and (3) to be original facility? We seek specific carriage due to the relocation of the 1.0 exempt in such community from comment on the effects on small simulcast channel is not consistent with entities: (1) Would allowing another station’s assertion of its network non-duplication or syndicated the purposes of local simulcasting, broadcasters to use these vacant exclusivity rights. We tentatively agree which includes maintaining existing channels help small broadcasters with ATVA that we should maintain the television service to viewers within the transition, (2) would allowing status quo in the significantly viewed station’s original coverage area but does broadcasters to use these vacant context with respect to 1.0 simulcast not include expanding service into new channels impose carriage burdens on signals.8 We note that our tentative areas. We seek comment on our small MVPDs, and (3) what can we do conclusion differs from how we proposal and tentative conclusions. We to ease the burdens on those entities? addressed this issue in the channel also seek comment on what effect our We seek comment on these and any sharing context. In the Incentive proposal and tentative conclusions other issues that we would need to Auction Report and Order, the would have on small broadcasters and address if we allow full power Commission found that because MVPDs. broadcasters to use vacant channels as significantly viewed status is largely a II. Procedural Matters temporary transition channels. function of signal availability, a station 3. Significantly Viewed Status of Next moving to a new channel should lose its A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Gen TV Stations status at the relinquished location. But unlike the channel sharing context, Next 12. As required by the Regulatory 9. We tentatively conclude that the Gen TV broadcasters are not Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended significantly viewed status of a Next relinquishing their original channel, but (RFA), the Federal Communications Gen TV station should not change if it rather will continue to operate on it and Commission (Commission) has prepared moves its 1.0 simulcast channel to a will ultimately return to it when the this present Initial Regulatory temporary host facility.5 Under our local simulcasting period ends. That is, Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning proposal, a commercial television the relocation of the 1.0 signal is the possible significant economic station that relocates its 1.0 simulcast temporary and a Next Gen TV impact on a substantial number of small channel could not seek to gain broadcaster will continue to reach the entities by the policies and rules significantly viewed status in new communities or counties in which it is proposed in the Further Notice of communities or counties and such significantly viewed with an over-the- Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM). Written station could not lose significantly air signal, albeit in 3.0.9 public comments are requested on this viewed status in communities or IRFA. Comments must be identified as counties for which it qualified prior to 6 We note that, in order to obtain a waiver of the responses to the IRFA and must be filed network nonduplication and syndicated-exclusivity by the deadlines for comments provided the move of its 1.0 simulcast channel. rules (collectively, ‘‘exclusivity rules’’), petitioners We seek comment on this tentative seeking to reassert exclusivity rights on on the first page of the item. The conclusion. In the Report and Order, we significantly viewed stations are required to Commission will send a copy of the impose a freeze on the filing of any demonstrate for two consecutive years that a station FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the was no longer significantly viewed, based either on requests to change the significantly community-specific or system-specific over-the-air Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small viewed status of a Next Gen TV station viewing data, following the methodology set forth Business Administration (SBA).11 In that is moving its 1.0 simulcast channel in 47 CFR 76.54(b). addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or 7 Significantly viewed status is an exception to the ‘‘no distant where local’’ requirement which 4 We note that the Commission has an open prohibits satellite carriage of distant (out-of-market) original location is relevant in the significantly proceeding seeking comment on whether to stations. viewed context. Moreover, considering 3.0 service preserve a vacant channel in every area for white 8 We note that ATVA argues the Commission in this regard will not impose additional mandatory space device and wireless microphone use. should ‘‘prohibit simulcasts that reduce a station’s carriage obligations on MVPDs (because MVPD 5 Significantly viewed stations are commercial eligibility for ‘significantly viewed’ carriage’’ and carriage of significantly viewed stations is television stations that the Commission has urges that the Commission ‘‘not adopt the approach voluntary). determined have ‘‘significant’’ over-the-air (i.e., it took to channel sharing.’’ Although we do not 10 We note that significantly viewed status does non-cable and non-satellite) viewing and are thus restrict simulcasts in the manner sought by ATVA, not confer mandatory carriage rights to the station, treated as local stations in certain respects with we tentatively agree with ATVA in this FNPRM to but rather only allows carriage of the station via regard to a particular community in another the extent that ATVA seeks to maintain the status retransmission consent. Thus, maintaining the television market. The Significantly Viewed quo with respect to significantly viewed carriage status quo with respect to eligibility for Stations List is maintained on Commission’s while local simulcasting is required. significantly viewed carriage presents no mandatory website at https://transition.fcc.gov/mb/significant 9 We tentatively conclude that the availability of carriage burdens on MVPDs. viewedstations061817.pdf. the 3.0 signal to the station’s existing viewers at its 11 See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules 60353

summaries thereof) will be published in consider for NCE and/or Class A §§ 76.5(i) and 76.54 of our rules. the Federal Register.12 stations. Significantly viewed status allows the 15. Simulcast Exceptions.14 In the significantly viewed station (1) to be 1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order, we exempt LPTV and carried by a satellite carrier in such Proposed Rules TV translator stations from our local community in the other market; (2) to be 13. In this Further Notice of Proposed simulcasting requirement and allow carried in such community by cable and Rulemaking, we seek further comment these stations to transition directly to satellite operators at the reduced on three topics related to the rules 3.0 service. In this FNPRM, we also seek copyright payment applicable to local adopted in the companion Report and comment on whether to exempt NCE (in-market) stations; and (3) to be Order, which authorizes television and/or Class A stations as a class from exempt in such community from broadcasters to use the ‘‘Next our local simulcasting requirement or another station’s assertion of its network Generation’’ broadcast television (Next adopt a presumptive waiver standard for non-duplication or syndicated Gen TV) transmission standard, also such stations. Class A and NCE stations exclusivity rights. Under our proposal, a called ‘‘ATSC 3.0’’ or ‘‘3.0,’’ on a could also face more difficulty than commercial television station that voluntary, market-driven basis. Next commercial full power stations face relocates its 1.0 simulcast channel could Gen TV broadcasters will continue to when seeking a local simulcasting not seek to gain significantly viewed deliver current-generation digital partner. status in new communities or counties television (DTV) service, using the 16. Temporary Use of Vacant and such station could not lose ATSC 1.0 transmission standard, also Channels. Second, we seek comment on significantly viewed status in called ‘‘ATSC 1.0’’ or ‘‘1.0,’’ to their whether we should let full power communities or counties for which it viewers via ‘‘local simulcasting.’’ broadcasters use channels in the qualified prior to the move of its 1.0 14. Simulcast Waivers and television broadcast band that are simulcast channel. vacant to facilitate the transition to 3.0. Exceptions. First, we seek further 2. Legal Basis comment on issues related to exceptions In the Next Gen TV NPRM, the to and waivers of the local simulcasting Commission asked whether we should 18. The proposed action is authorized requirement. In the Report and Order, ‘‘consider allowing broadcasters [that pursuant to sections 1, 4, 301, 303, 307, we explain that we will consider wish to deploy ATSC 3.0 service] to use 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), 336, 338, requests for waiver of our local vacant in-band channels remaining in 399b, 403, 534, and 535 of the Communications Act of 1934, as simulcasting requirement on a case-by- the market after the incentive auction amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, case basis, including (1) requests repack to serve as temporary host 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), 336, seeking to transition directly from 1.0 to facilities for ATSC 1.0 or 3.0 338, 399b, 403, 534, and 535. 3.0 service on the station’s existing programming by multiple broadcasters.’’ facility without simulcasting in 1.0 and ONE Media requests that in markets 3. Description and Estimate of the (2) requests to air a 1.0 simulcast with vacant channels, the Commission Number of Small Entities To Which the channel from a host location that does should allow full power broadcasters to Proposed Rules Will Apply use the vacant channels as ‘‘dedicated not cover all or a portion of the station’s 19. The RFA directs agencies to community of license or from which the transition channels to ensure maximum continuity of service, just as it did provide a description of, and where station can provide only a lower signal feasible, an estimate of the number of during the transition from analog to threshold over the community than that small entities that may be affected by 13 digital.’’ The LPTV Spectrum Rights required by the rules. With respect to the proposed rules, if adopted. The Coalition opposes ONE Media’s such requests, we state: ‘‘We are types of small entities that may be proposal on the ground that it would inclined to consider favorably requests affected by the R&O fall within the diminish LPTV licensing rights in the for waiver of our local simulcasting following categories: (1) Wired middle of the displacement process. The requirement where the Next Gen TV Telecommunications Carriers, of which Wi-Fi Alliance, Microsoft, the station can demonstrate that it has no 3,083 are estimated to be small entities; Consumers Union et al., and Dynamic viable local simulcasting partner in its (2) Cable Companies and Systems (Rate Spectrum Alliance also oppose any market and where the station agrees to Regulation), of which 3,900 are approach that would expand make reasonable efforts to preserve 1.0 estimated to be small entities; (3) Cable broadcasters’ spectrum rights in service to existing viewers in its System Operators (Telecom Act conjunction with ATSC 3.0 deployment, community of license and/or otherwise Standard), of which 52,403,696 are and they express concern about minimize the impact on such viewers estimated to be small entities; (4) Direct damaging the potential success of white (for example, by providing free or low Broadcast Satellite Service, of which space use in the television bands. cost ATSC 3.0 converters to viewers).’’ 3,083 are estimated to be small entities, 17. Significantly Viewed Status of In this FNPRM, we seek comment on but internally developed FCC data Next Gen TV Stations. Finally, we what further guidance we should suggest that in general DBS service is tentatively conclude that local provide about the circumstances in only provided by large entities; (5) simulcasting should not change the which we will grant a waiver of the Satellite Master Antenna Television significantly viewed status of a Next local simulcasting requirement. Among (SMATV) Systems, also known as Gen TV station. Stations that vary their other things, we ask how we should Private Cable Operators (PCOs),of which signal strength or change their location determine if a station has a ‘‘viable’’ 3,083 are estimated to be small entities; as a result of moving their 1.0 signal to simulcast partner and whether there are (6) Home Satellite Dish (HSD) Service, simulcast raise the question of how this special circumstances we should of which 3,083 are estimated to be small change may affect their status as entities; (7) Open Video Services, of ‘‘significantly viewed’’ in certain 12 See id. which 3,083 are estimated to be small communities or counties under 13 The Commission may waive its rules if good entities; (8) Wireless Cable Systems— cause is shown. See 47 CFR 1.3. We explain in the Report and Order that we are not inclined to 14 Unlike waivers which are considered on a case- Broadband Radio Service and consider favorably requests to change community of by-case basis, exceptions or class waivers do not Educational Broadband Service, of license solely to enable simulcasting. require the filing of a waiver request. which 440 (BBS) and 2,241 (EBS) are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS 60354 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules

estimated to be small entities; (9) from, the local simulcasting requirement B. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers may afford more flexibility to 1995 Analysis (ILECs) and Small Incumbent Local broadcasters, including small entities, 26. This NPRM may result in new or Exchange Carriers, of which 3,083 are that may face unique challenges in revised information collection estimated to be small entities; (10) Radio finding a suitable simulcasting partner. requirements. If the Commission adopts and Television Broadcasting and This added flexibility may reduce costs any new or revised information Wireless Communications Equipment for such small entities. collection requirements, the Manufacturing, of which 819 are 23. Temporary Use of Vacant Commission will publish a notice in the estimated to be small entities; (11) Channels. The FNPRM seeks comment Federal Register inviting the public to Audio and Video Equipment on whether we should allow full power comment on such requirements, as Manufacturing of which 465 are broadcasters to use vacant channels in required by the Paperwork Reduction estimated to be small entities; (12) and the television broadcast band to Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the Television Broadcasting, of which 656 Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of (commercial stations), 395 (NCE facilitate the transition to 3.0, and, if so, 2002, the Commission will seek specific stations), 2,344 (LPTV), and 3,689 (TV when they should be able to use these comment on how it might ‘‘further translator stations) are estimated to be channels, and what procedures we reduce the information collection small entities. should use to authorize that use. We seek specific comment on the effects on burden for small business concerns with 4. Description of Projected Reporting, small entities: (1) Would allowing fewer than 25 employees.’’ Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance broadcasters to use these vacant C. Ex Parte Rules Requirements channels help small broadcasters 20. The FNPRM does not propose any transition to 3.0?, 16 (2) would allowing 27. Permit But Disclose. The new reporting, recordkeeping, or broadcasters to use these vacant proceeding this Notice initiates shall be compliance requirements. However, if channels impose carriage burdens on treated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ the Commission decides to allow the small MVPDs?, and (3) what can we do proceeding in accordance with the use of unused channels, there may be to ease the burdens on those small Commission’s ex parte rules. Ex parte new reporting requirements, such as the entities? presentations are permissible if disclosed in accordance with filing of an application with the 24. Significantly Viewed Status of Commission. Additionally, if the Commission rules, except during the Next Gen TV Stations. The FNPRM Sunshine Agenda period when Commission decides to adopt specific tentatively concludes that the criteria for its waiver standard, these presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are significantly viewed status of a Next generally prohibited. Persons making ex may be considered new compliance Gen TV station should not change if it requirements. parte presentations must file a copy of moves its 1.0 simulcast channel to a any written presentation or a 5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant temporary host facility. Under this memorandum summarizing any oral Economic Impact on Small Entities and proposal, a commercial television presentation within two business days Significant Alternatives Considered station that relocates its 1.0 simulcast after the presentation (unless a different channel could not seek to gain 21. The RFA requires an agency to deadline applicable to the Sunshine significantly viewed status in new describe any significant alternatives that period applies). Persons making oral ex communities or counties and such it has considered in reaching its parte presentations are reminded that station could not lose significantly proposed approach, which may include memoranda summarizing the viewed status in communities or the following four alternatives (among presentation must (1) list all persons counties for which it qualified prior to others): ‘‘(1) The establishment of attending or otherwise participating in the move of its 1.0 simulcast channel. differing compliance or reporting the meeting at which the ex parte We tentatively conclude that requirements or timetables that take into presentation was made, and (2) maintaining the status quo with respect account the resources available to small summarize all data presented and to eligibility for significantly viewed entities; (2) the clarification, arguments made during the carriage would avoid some consolidation, or simplification of presentation. Memoranda must contain complications and disruptions to compliance and reporting requirements a summary of the substance of the ex MVPDs and their subscribers, who have under the rule for such small entities; parte presentation and not merely a come to rely on such signals. We seek (3) the use of performance rather than listing of the subjects discussed. More comment on what effect our proposal design standards; and (4) an exemption than a one or two sentence description and tentative conclusion would have on from coverage of the rule, or any part of the views and arguments presented is small broadcasters and MVPDs. thereof, for small entities.’’ 15 generally required. If the presentation 22. Local Simulcasting Waivers and 6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, consisted in whole or in part of the Exceptions. The FNPRM seeks comment Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed presentation of data or arguments on two issues related to waivers of the Rule already reflected in the presenter’s local simulcasting requirement: (1) The written comments, memoranda or other circumstances in which we should grant 25. None. filings in the proceeding, the presenter a waiver of our local simulcasting may provide citations to such data or requirement for full power and Class A 16 For example, NCTA opposes temporary use of arguments in his or her prior comments, stations; and (2) whether we should vacant channels in the television broadcast band for memoranda, or other filings (specifying ATSC 1.0 simulcast signals. NCTA Reply at 8. permit NCE and Class A stations to NCTA explains that ‘‘[a]llowing use of a ‘temporary’ the relevant page and/or paragraph transition directly from ATSC 1.0 to 3.0. channel for these purposes would impose new, numbers where such data or arguments As noted in Section C. of this IRFA, unreimbursed costs on cable operators. Operators can be found) in lieu of summarizing NCE and Class A stations are considered might need to purchase and install new them in the memorandum. Documents equipment—or at a minimum, incur the labor costs small entities. Waiver of, or exemption and burdens of repointing receive antennas at the shown or given to Commission staff headend—to be able to continue to receive a station during ex parte meetings are deemed to 15 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)–(c)(4). transmitting on this new frequency.’’ Id. be written ex parte presentations and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules 60355

must be filed consistent with § 1.1206(b) addressed to 445 12th Street SW, final rule published May 3, 2017 (May of the rules. In proceedings governed by Washington, DC 20554. 2017 Final Rule). § 1.49(f) of the rules or for which the D People with Disabilities: To request DATES: Written comments on this Commission has made available a materials in accessible formats for proposed rule must be received by method of electronic filing, written ex people with disabilities (Braille, large January 19, 2018. Comments received parte presentations and memoranda print, electronic files, audio format), after that date will be considered to the summarizing oral ex parte send an email to [email protected] or call extent possible without incurring presentations, and all attachments the Consumer & Governmental Affairs additional expense or delay. thereto, must be filed through the Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– ADDRESSES: Comments related to Docket electronic comment filing system 418–0432 (tty). No. FRA–2009–0033 may be submitted available for that proceeding, and must III. Ordering Clauses by any of the following methods: be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 29. It is ordered, pursuant to the .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants http://www.regulations.gov and follow authority found in sections 1, 4, 7, 301, in this proceeding should familiarize the online instructions for submitting 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), themselves with the Commission’s ex comments; parte rules. 336, 338, 399b, 403, 614, and 615 of the • Mail: Docket Management Facility, Communications Act of 1934, as D. Filing Procedures U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 157, 301, W12–140, Washington, DC 20590; 28. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 325(b), • Hand Delivery: The Docket the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 336, 338, 399b, 403, 534, and 535, this Management Facility is located in Room 1.419, interested parties may file Report and Order and Further Notice of W12–140, West Building Ground Floor, comments and reply comments on or Proposed Rulemaking is hereby U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, before the dates indicated on the first adopted, effective thirty (30) days after Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 page of this document. Comments may the date of publication in the Federal p.m., Monday through Friday, except be filed using the Commission’s Register. Federal holidays; or Electronic Comment Filing System It is further ordered that the • Fax: 202–493–2251. (ECFS). Electronic Filers: Comments Commission’s Consumer and Instructions: All submissions must may be filed electronically using the Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference include the agency name and docket internet by accessing the ECFS: http:// Information Center, shall send a copy of number or Regulatory Identification apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. this Report and Order and Further Number (RIN) for this rulemaking D Electronic Filers: Comments may be Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (2130–AC70). All comments received filed electronically using the internet by including the Final Regulatory will be posted without change to http:// accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/ Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief www.regulations.gov; this includes any ecfs/. Counsel for Advocacy of the Small personal information. Please see the D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to Business Administration. Privacy Act heading in the file by paper must file an original and Federal Communications Commission. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of one copy of each filing. If more than one Marlene H. Dortch, this document for Privacy Act docket or rulemaking number appears in Secretary. information related to any submitted the caption of this proceeding, filers [FR Doc. 2017–27433 Filed 12–19–17; 8:45 am] comments or materials. Docket: For access to the docket to must submit two additional copies for BILLING CODE 6712–01–P each additional docket or rulemaking read background documents, petitions number. for reconsideration, or comments received, go to http:// D Filings can be sent by hand or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION messenger delivery, by commercial www.regulations.gov and follow the overnight courier, or by first-class or Federal Railroad Administration online instructions for accessing the overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All docket or visit the Docket Management filings must be addressed to the 49 CFR Part 243 Facility described above. Commission’s Secretary, Office of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Secretary, Federal Communications [Docket No. FRA–2009–0033, Notice No. 5] Robert J. Castiglione, Staff Director— Commission. RIN 2130–AC70 Human Performance Division, Federal D All hand-delivered or messenger- Railroad Administration, 4100 delivered paper filings for the Training, Qualification, and Oversight International Plaza, Suite 450, Fort Commission’s Secretary must be for Safety-Related Railroad Employees Worth, TX 76109–4820 (telephone: 817– delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 AGENCY: Federal Railroad 447–2715); or Alan H. Nagler, Senior 12th St., SW, Room TW–A325, Administration (FRA), Department of Trial Attorney, Federal Railroad Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours Transportation (DOT). Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202– deliveries must be held together with (NPRM). rubber bands or fasteners. Any 493–6038). envelopes and boxes must be disposed SUMMARY: In response to a petition for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On of before entering the building. reconsideration of a final rule, FRA November 7, 2014, FRA published a D Commercial overnight mail (other proposes to amend its regulations final rule (2014 Final Rule) that than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail (Training, Qualification, and Oversight established minimum training standards and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 for Safety-Related Railroad Employees) for each category and subcategory of Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD by delaying certain implementation safety-related railroad employees and 20701. dates an additional year. FRA required railroad carriers, contractors, D U.S. Postal Service first-class, previously delayed the regulations’ and subcontractors to submit training Express, and Priority mail must be implementation dates for one year in a programs to FRA for approval. See 79

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS