Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26863

Parts per Parts per § 180.344 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol and its sodium Commodity million Commodity million salt; tolerance for residues. A time-limited tolerance of 0.2 part Bananas ...... 5 Cucurbits ...... 0.5 per million, with an expiration date of Beans ...... 1 Flaxseed ...... 2.0 May 1, 1999, is established for residues Beans, straw ...... 1 Fruits, pome ...... 0.2 of the plant regulators 4,6-dinitro-o- Beets, sugar (roots) ...... 5 Fruits, small ...... 0.2 Beets, sugar (tops) ...... 5 Fruits, stone ...... 0.2 cresol (DNOC) and its sodium salt in or Cattle, mbyp ...... 0.2 Grain crops (exc wheat) ...... 0.5 on the raw agricultural commodity Cattle, meat ...... 0.2 Grasses, forage ...... 2 apples from application to apple trees at Coffee beans ...... 2 Hops ...... 0.2 the blossom stage as a fruit-thinning Corn, ear, dried (K+C) ...... 10 Legumes, forage ...... 2 agent. Corn, fodder ...... 5 Nuts ...... 0.2 Corn, forage ...... 5 Vegetables, fruiting ...... 0.2 § 180.363 [Removed] Corn, fresh (including sweet Vegetables, leafy ...... 0.5 l. By removing § 180.363 Fluchloralin; K+CWHR) ...... 5 Vegetables, root crop ...... 0.2 tolerances for residues. Corn, grain ...... 10 Vegetables, seed and pod ...... 0.5 Cottonseed ...... 35 Wheat ...... 2 PART 185Ð[AMENDED] Cranberries ...... 5 Eggs ...... 0.3 2. In part 185: § 180.161 [Removed] Flaxseed ...... 75 a. The authority citation for part 185 Goats, mbyp ...... 0.2 f. By removing § 180.161 Manganous continues to read as follows: Goats, meat ...... 0.2 Grapefruit ...... 5 dimethyldithio-carbamate; tolerances Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 348. Grapes ...... 3 for residues. Grasses, pasture ...... 10 g. By revising § 180.230 Diphenamid; b. By revising § 185.1500 Dalapon; Grasses, range ...... 10 tolerances for residues to read as tolerances for residues to read as Hogs, mbyp ...... 0.2 follows. Hogs, meat ...... 0.2 follows. Lemons ...... 5 § 180.230 Diphenamid; tolerances for § 185.1500 Dalapon; tolerances for Limes ...... 5 residues. residues. Macadamia nuts ...... 1 Milk ...... 0.1 A time-limited tolerance with an A time-limited tolerance of 0.2 part Oranges ...... 5 expiration date of May 1, 1999, is per million, with an expiration date of Peaches ...... 15 established for the residues of the May 1, 1999, is established for the Pears ...... 3 herbicide dipenamid (N,N,-dimethyl- residues of the herbicide dalapon (2,2- Peas, shelled ...... 15 2,2-diphenylacetamide) including its dichloropropionic acid) in potable water Peas, unshelled ...... 15 desmethyl metabolite N-methyl-2,2- when present therein as a result of the Peas, vine, with pod ...... 15 application of dalapon sodium- Peas, vine, without pod ...... 15 diphenylacetamide in or on the raw Pecans ...... 0.1 agricultural commodities as follows: magnesium salt mixtures to irrigation Pineapples ...... 3 2 parts per million in or on peanut hay and ditch banks in the western United Plums ...... 1 forage. States. Potatoes ...... 10 1 parts per million in or on potatoes and Poultry, (excluding kidney) ...... 3 strawberries. § 185.2900 [Removed] Poultry, kidney ...... 9 0.5 parts per million in or on peanut hulls c. By removing § 185.2900 Ethyl Sheep, mbyp ...... 0.2 and soybean hay and forage. formate; tolerances for residues. Sheep, meat ...... 0.2 0.2 parts per million in or on cotton forage. Sorghum ...... 1 0.1 parts per million (negligible residue) in PART 186Ð[AMENDED] Sorghum, forage ...... 5 or on apples, cottonseed, fruiting vegetables, Soybeans ...... 1 okra, peaches, peanuts, soybeans, and sweet 3. In part 186: Soybeans, straw ...... 1 potatoes. 0.05 parts per million in or on (negligible a. The authority citation for part 186 Sugarcane ...... 0.1 continues to read as follows: Tangerines ...... 5 residue) in meat, fat, and meat byproducts of Walnuts ...... 5 cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep. Authority: 21 U.S.C. 348. 0.01 parts per million (negligible residue) (b) A time-limited tolerance, with an in milk. 1.0 parts per million in or on raspberries. b. By revising § 186.1500 Dalapon; expiration date of May 1, 1999, is tolerances for residues to read as established for residues of dalapon (2,2- follows: dichloropropionic acid) resulting from § 180.244 [Removed] application of dalapon sodium- § 186.1500 Dalapon; tolerances for magnesium salt mixtures to irrigation h. By removing § 180.244 Basic zinc residues. ditch banks in the western United States sulfate; tolerances for residues. A time-limited tolerance of 20 parts in or on the following raw agricultural per million, with an expiration date of § 180.250 [Removed] commodities. Where tolerances are May 1, 1999, is established for residues established at higher levels from other i. By removing § 180.250 of the herbicide dalapon (2,2- uses of dalapon on the subject crops, the Metobromuron; tolerances for residues. dichloropropionic acid) in dehydrated higher tolerance applies also to residues citrus pulp for cattle feed, when present § 180.325 [Removed] from the irrigation ditch bank use. therein as a result of the application of j. By removing § 180.325 2-(m- dalapon sodium salt or dalapon sodium- Commodity Parts per Chlorophenoxy) propionic acid; magnesium salt mixtures during the million tolerances for residues. growing of citrus fruit. Avocados ...... 0.2 k. By revising § 180.344 4,6-Dinitro-o- [FR Doc. 96–13442 Filed 5–28–96; 8:45 am] Citrus fruits ...... 0.2 cresol and its sodium salt; tolerance for BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Cottonseed ...... 0.2 residues to read as follows. 26864 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Advisory Committee on Advanced television technologies by television COMMISSION Television Service (‘‘Advisory broadcast licensees.’’ 3 Committee’’ or ‘‘ACATS’’).1 We have the 3. The Commission empaneled the 47 CFR Chapter I following objectives with regard to the Advisory Committee on Advanced [MM Docket No. 87±268; FCC: 96±207] authorization and implementation of a Television Service (ACATS) shortly DTV standard.2 We seek to ensure that after having opened the inquiry phase of Broadcast Services; Television all affected parties have sufficient this proceeding. Among other activities, Stations confidence and certainty in order to ACATS designed the detailed testing promote the smooth introduction of a AGENCY: Federal Communications plans for the system and conducted free and universally available digital Commission. substantial related studies. broadcast television service. We seek to ACTION: Proposed rule. 4. On May 24, 1993 the three groups increase the availability of new products that had developed the four final DTV and services to consumers through the SUMMARY: The Commission proposes to systems examined by ACATS agreed to introduction of digital broadcasting. We require digital broadcast television produce a single, best-of-the-best system seek to ensure that our rules encourage licensees to use the digital television to propose as the standard. The three technological innovation and (‘‘DTV’’) system described by the ATSC ventures that joined to become the competition. And we seek to minimize (‘‘Advanced Television Systems ‘‘Grand Alliance’’ consisted of AT&T regulation and assure that any Committee’’) DTV Standard and and Zenith Electronics Corporation; regulations we do adopt remain in effect recommended to the Commission by the General Instrument Corporation and no longer than necessary. Advisory Committee on Advanced Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Television Service. The Commission II. Background and Philips Electronics North America also proposes to adopt one or more Corporation, Thomson Consumer method of assuring that at some future 2. On February 13, 1987, 58 broadcast Electronics, and the David Sarnoff time the Standard does not inhibit organizations (‘‘Petitioners’’) filed a Research Center. The standard innovation and competition. The joint ‘‘Petition for Notice of Inquiry’’ recommended by ACATS and now intended effect is to ensure that all asking the Commission to initiate a before us is based on the system affected partieis have sufficient proceeding to explore issues arising developed, built, and proposed by the confidence and certainty in order to from the advent of new and advanced Digital HDTV Grand Alliance proposal promote the smooth introduction of a television (‘‘ATV’’) technologies and to ACATS. The system described by the free and universally available digital their possible impact, in either ATSC 4 DTV Standard having been broadcast television service while broadcast or non-broadcast uses, on successfully designed, built and tested, encouraging technological innovation existing television broadcast service. On in November 1995, the Advisory and competition. July 16, 1987, as a result of the Committee voted to recommend the DATES: Comments are due by July 11, comments it received in response to the Commission’s adoption of the ATSC 1996, and reply comments are due by petition, the Commission inaugurated DTV Standard. August 12, 1996. the instant proceeding, ‘‘to consider the 5. We believe that the ATSC DTV ADDRESSES: Federal Communications technical and public policy issues Standard embodies the world’s best Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., surrounding the use of advanced Washington, D.C. 20554 digital television technology and promises to permit striking FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 ACATS Report at 19. The Advisory Committee improvements to today’s television Roger Holberg, Mass Media Bureau, was formed by the Commission on October 16, 1987, pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee pictures and sound; to permit the Policy and Rules Division (202) 418– provision of additional services and 2134 or Saul Shapiro, Mass Media Act (86 Stat. 770, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 § 1 et seq. (1982 ed. and Supp. V)). It was established programs; to permit integration of future Bureau, (202) 418–2600. ‘‘to assist the Commission in considering the issues substantial improvements while surrounding the introduction of advanced SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a maintaining compatibility with initial synopsis of the Commission’s Fifth television service in the United States.’’ (Notice, 52 Fed. Reg. 38523 (October 16, 1987).) The Advisory receivers; and to permit interoperability Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making Committee consisted of a twenty-five member with computers and other digital in MM Docket No. 87–268 , FCC 96– parent committee and three subcommittees— equipment associated with the national Planning, Systems and Implementation. Its 207, adopted May 9, 1996, and released information initiative. May 20, 1996. The complete text of this membership on the date that the ATSC DTV Standard was recommended to the Commission is FNPRM is available for inspection and at Appendix B. 3 Notice of Inquiry in MM Docket No. 87–268, copying during normal business hours 2 In issuing this Notice, we are requesting (‘‘First Inquiry’’), 2 FCC Rcd 5125 (1987). in the FCC Reference Center (Room comment, inter alia, on whether to accept the 4 ‘‘ATSC’’ is the Advanced Television Systems 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, conclusions of the Final Report and Committee. ATSC currently has 54 members Recommendation of the Advisory Committee, including television networks, motion picture and D.C., and also may be purchased from adopted November 28, 1995 (‘‘ACATS Report’’), television program producers, trade associations, the Commission’s copy contractor, which recommends the Advanced Television International Transcription Service, Systems Committee Standard A/53 (1995) ATSC television and other electronic equipment manufacturers and segments of the academic (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., Digital Television Standard (‘‘ATSC DTV Standard’’) as the standard for DTV broadcasting in community. It was formed by the member Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037. the United States. This standard is based on the organizations of the Joint Committee on Synopsis of Further Notice of Proposed Advisory Committee design specifications and the InterSociety Coordination (‘‘JCIC’’) for the purpose Digital HDTV Grand Alliance (‘‘Grand Alliance’’) of exploring the need for and, where appropriate, Rule Making System. The ACATS Report is hereby incorporated to coordinate development of the documentation of I. Introduction into the record of this proceeding. Copies of the ATV systems. The JCIC is composed of the ACATS Report are available through the Electronic Industries Association, the Institute of Commission’s copy contractor, International 1. In this proceeding we consider Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the National Transcription Services. Additionally, the ACATS adoption of a digital television (‘‘DTV’’) Report, ACATS Final Technical Report and ATSC Association of Broadcasters, the National Cable broadcast standard. This action has been DTV Standard are available on the Internet at the Television Association, and the Society of Motion recommended to the Commission by its ATSC site (http://www.atsc.org). Picture and Television Engineers. The membership of the ATSC when it adopted the ATSC DTV Standard is at Appendix C. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26865

III. The ATSC DTV Standard users may select. In addition to the 7. Format selection: The ATSC DTV 6. The five components described in required provisions, some additional Standard supports a variety of scanning the annexes to the ATSC DTV Standard provisions of the ATSC DTV Standard formats. Table I shows the number of are video coding, audio coding, are recommended but not required, and scanning lines and horizontal picture transport, RF/transmission and receiver. others are optional. Finally, although it elements (or pixels) per line, which These five basic components, plus a describes the coding and transmission affect resolution. The 720-line and 1080- video format selection function, are of television video and audio, it also line formats below represent high sometimes referred to as comprising allows transmission of a variety of other resolution video. The lower-resolution ‘‘layers’’ of the system. Compliance with services as ‘‘ancillary data.’’ This 480-line formats accommodate existing the ATSC DTV Standard requires some structure makes the system described by NTSC 5 programming and equipment as of its provisions be followed, but many the ATSC DTV Standard extremely well as material designed for viewing on of these provisions include numerous flexible and gives it room to incorporate VGA computer monitors. acceptable options that the system’s a wide range of future improvements.

TABLE I

Aspect Vertical lines Horizontal pixels ratio Picture rate

1080 ...... 1920 ...... 16:9 60I 30P 24P 720 ...... 1280 ...... 16:9 60P 30P 24P 480 ...... 704 ...... 16:9 4:3 60I 60P 30P 24P 480 ...... 640 ...... 4:3 60I 60P 30P 24P

8. Table I also indicates that the high- television pictures is reduced using a captioning and any other data resolution formats both use a picture variety of tools, including a motion associated with a single digital aspect ratio of 16 units horizontally by compensated discrete cosine transform television program are combined using 9 units vertically (that is, a picture 16 (DCT) algorithm and bidirectional-frame a mechanism to ensure that the sound, inches wide would be 9 inches tall or (B-frame) prediction. Each of these tools pictures and closed captioning one 32 inches wide would be 18 inches serves to improve compression information can be synchronized at the tall). The choices of 1280 pixels per line efficiency by reducing the total amount receiver. Data describing multiple for the 720-line format and 1920 pixels of digital information that needs to be television programs, or unrelated data per line for the 1080-line format result transmitted. for other purposes, are also combined in in square pixels (that is, pixels which 11. Audio coding: For compression of the transport layer. are displayed at equal distances, both audio signals, the ATSC DTV Standard horizontally and vertically) for both requires conformance with ATSC Doc. 13. RF/Transmission: The formats, based on the 16:9 aspect ratio. A/52, the Digital Audio Compression transmission layer of the ATSC DTV Material in the 480-line by 704-pixel (AC–3) Standard. The AC–3 perceptual Standard uses a vestigial sideband format could use either a 16:9 or a 4:3 coding system, which was developed by (VSB) technique with a small pilot aspect ratio. Dolby Labs, can encode a complete carrier added at the suppressed carrier 9. The picture rates specified in Table main audio service which includes left, frequency. The relationship of the pilot I identify the number of images that are center, right, left surround, right carrier frequency to interference to sent each second, with an ‘‘I’’ surround, and low frequency lower adjacent channel NTSC service is designating interlaced scanning and a enhancement channels into a bit stream discussed in the ‘‘interference’’ section ‘‘P’’ designating progressive scanning. at a rate of 384 kilobits per second below. Progressive scanning lines are presented (kbps). Audio service can also include 14. Terrestrial broadcasts of DTV will in succession from the top of the picture fewer channels (down to single channel, be exposed to situations that include to the bottom, with a complete image monophonic service) using a lower bit strong interfering signals, sent in each frame as is commonly rate. electromagnetic noise from numerous found in computer displays today. For 12. Transport: The service multiplex sources, and configurations of buildings interlaced scanning, which also is used and transport layer of the ATSC DTV or terrain features that cause multipath in NTSC television, odd and even Standard is a compatible subset of the interference. For successful reception numbered lines of the picture are sent MPEG–2 systems standard that under these difficult conditions, an 8- consecutively, as two separate fields. describes a means of delivering a digital level VSB signal is specified and These two fields are superimposed to data stream in fixed-length ‘‘packets’’ of extensive error correction is provided. create one frame, or complete picture, at information. Each packet contains only Taking into account the transport the receiver. The picture rates can be 24, one type of data: video, audio or 30 or 60 fields per second. ancillary. There is no fixed mix of requirements and error correction, the 10. Video coding: For compression of packet types, which further helps 8–VSB signal carries an effective useful video signals, the ATSC DTV Standard provide flexibility. Channel capacity payload of approximately 19.28 requires conformance with the main can be dynamically allocated in the megabits per second (Mbps). For more profile syntax of the MPEG–2 video transport layer, under the direct control benign environments, like that provided standard.6 Employing this standard, the of the broadcaster. Within the transport in a cable system, the ATSC DTV amount of data needed to represent layer, the packets of video, audio, closed

5 NTSC refers to the current analog television television standard in 1940–41 and the color 6 MPEG–2 is a video compression and transport system. It is named for the National Television television standard in 1950–53. standard created by the Moving Picture Experts System Committee, an industry group that Group of the International Organization for developed the monochrome (black and white) Standardization (ISO). 26866 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Standard includes a 16-level VSB high broadcasting system in a timely Committee and no other competing data rate mode that provides double the manner.8 However, we also stated that technology appears to demonstrate capacity of the 8-level VSB terrestrial the continuation of mandatory superiority over the ATSC DTV broadcast mode. standards may no longer be necessary Standard.15 Thus, concerns with the 15. Receiver: The ATSC DTV and may even be counterproductive.9 possibility of multiple competing Standard does not specify requirements 20. In the 1988 Second Inquiry, we systems may be less relevant today. for a compliant receiver. In essence, the continued our examination of whether 23. Second, prior to the development DTV receiver designs are to be based on the NTSC standard should be relaxed or of the ATSC DTV Standard, it was the specifications of the signal repealed, how standards should be widely believed that the service offered contained in the other portions of the established for advanced television, and by a licensee would change from one Standard. The receiver reverses the whether it would be desirable to require NTSC program stream to one HDTV functions of the RF/transmission and compatibility between advanced program stream. Today’s digital transport layers, and, after television broadcast transmissions and technologies and improved compression decompression, generates video and other ATV distribution media.10 In this techniques create the opportunity for audio suitable for its display. regard, we asserted that establishing a delivering one, and under special 16. Flexibility. The ATSC DTV standard has certain advantages such as circumstances perhaps two, HDTV Standard provides a method of pointing the various interested parties program streams, or multiple program accommodating a broad range of uses. in the same direction, reducing the risk streams at lower resolution. The packetized transport structure is a to both audiences and broadcasters of Furthermore, digital technologies give critical component in achieving this investments in systems that might each licensee the technical capacity to broad level of flexibility. Scrambled become obsolete if a different system is explore new business opportunities and packets can be sent, which allows introduced in the market, and provide new services. If the ATSC DTV conditional access subscription or pay- overcoming reluctance to invest in new Standard is as dynamic as believed, a per-view services to be delivered. equipment.11 We also stated that, required standard will not thwart 17. Extensibility. In the future, new ‘‘detailed, inflexible standards that have technical advance. services may be uniquely identified the force of law may reduce consumer 24. Analysis of Required Standards. through the use of new packet choice and prevent the timely The traditional rationale for requiring a identifiers that would be ignored by introduction of new technology.’’ 12 standard arises when two conditions are previously deployed digital receivers. 21. Subsequent to our statements met.16 First, that there is a substantial Such data could be used to augment concerning standards in the 1987 and public benefit from a standard. Second, DTV programs or could permit new 1988 decisions, as described above, we private industry either will not, or services that have not yet been concluded in 1990 that ‘‘[c]onsistent cannot, produce a standard because the envisioned. Either extension of the DTV with our goal of ensuring excellence in private costs of getting involved in service would require new DTV ATV service, we intend to select a standard setting outweigh the private receivers or new decoder devices to be simulcast high definition television benefits, or a number of different developed and used in order to obtain system.’’ 13 We also stated that, ‘‘parties standards have been developed and the benefits of the new service or filing comments in response to the private industry cannot agree which functionality, but would not disrupt Further Notice generally assume that the should become the standard. The provision of DTV service to consumers Commission will ultimately authorize a second condition may not be applicable using existing sets. The marketplace system using new technology that will in view of the strong industry would determine the extent to which provide HDTV service.’’ (Footnote coalescence around the ATSC DTV sets with new functionalities are omitted.) 14 The Commission’s Standard. However, we believe that the available. November 14, 1990 Memorandum of first condition applies to DTV. IV. Adopting the ATSC DTV Standard Understanding with the Advisory Television today is a ubiquitous service Committee, the Advanced Television that is available to almost every 18. There is near universal agreement Test Center, Inc., Cable Television American household and is relied on by that transmission standards, either de Laboratories, Inc., and the Canadian a majority of Americans as their primary 7 facto or de jure, confer many benefits. Communications Research Centre, said, news and information source.17 We believe that the proposals discussed ‘‘[t]he FCC’s stated intention is to select 25. A required standard may provide herein would enable consumers, an ATV standard by the second quarter additional certainty to consumers, licensees and equipment manufacturers of 1993.’’ licensees, and equipment to realize the benefits of standards 22. Recent Developments. Two recent manufacturers, especially during the without unduly restricting innovation developments are relevant to whether launch of this new technology. A and competition. and, if so, what form of a required required standard may protect 19. Previous Statements. Previously, standard is desirable. First, the presence consumers against losses by assuring we have asked whether mandatory of multiple competing systems them that their investments in DTV transmission standards serve the public strengthened the argument for selecting equipment will not be made obsolete by interest. In our initial 1987 Notice of a standard. Today, only one system has a different technology. In addition, Inquiry in this proceeding, we noted been recommended by our Advisory requiring use of a single standard that NTSC standards were established 15 during the television industry’s infancy 8 First Inquiry, supra at 5135. ACATS Report at 17. 16 when universal compatibility standards 9 1Id. Stanley M. Besen and Garth Saloner, ‘‘The Economics of Telecommunications Standards,’’ in were arguably necessary in order to 10 Tentative Decision and Further Notice of Changing the Rules: Technological Change, Inquiry in MM Docket No. 87–268 (‘‘Second develop a national television International Competition, and Regulation in Inquiry’’), 3 FCC Rcd 6520, 6534 (1988). Communications, Robert W. Crandall and Kenneth 11 7 For a discussion of the benefits of standards, see Id. at 6534–35. Flamm, editors (The Brookings Institute, 1989). 12 Stanley M. Besen and Leland L. Johnson, Id. at 6535. 17 Seventy-two percent of Americans rely on Compatibility Standards, Competition, and 13 First Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 5626, 5628 television as their primary source of news. NTVA, Innovation in the Broadcast Industry (Santa (1990). Roper-Starch, NAB, America’s Watching—Public Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation, 1986) at 7–9. 14 Id. Attitudes Toward Television-1995, at 17. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26867 guarantees compatibility. This assures people rely for both information and the ATSC DTV Standard significantly consumers that the DTV equipment they entertainment. Additionally, unlike reduces some of the potential purchase to view one television station these other services, free over-the-air detriments associated with a required can be used to view every other broadcast television is a mass market standard as the new technology is being television station. The compatibility media serving nearly all of the launched. The packetized structure of guaranteed by a single required standard American public nationwide rather than the data transport, as described above, may also reduce consumer costs by a subscription service in which the ensures a flexibility that will permit the eliminating the need to purchase service provider may supply the DTV licensee to provide, for instance, duplicative equipment or special reception equipment.21 In this context, several standard definition programs, or devices to convert from one standard to the goals of certainty and reliability take one high-definition program, or some another. Finally, a required standard on a different significance than may standard definition programming may lead to a more rapid development have been present with respect to other together with data transfer or electronic and acceptance of DTV equipment. communications services and publishing on the remaining bit streams, Absent a required standard, some strengthens the case for our adoption of and to switch instantaneously between consumers and licensees may be a DTV standard. such applications. Other applications reluctant to purchase DTV equipment if 28. Proposal. We propose to adopt the are limited primarily by the imagination they believe that different DTV ATSC DTV Standard. We tentatively of the DTV licensee. This means that a technologies may become available in conclude that requiring the use of the wide array of innovations can be the near future. A required standard ATSC DTV Standard is appropriate introduced without Commission action. may reduce such ‘‘wait and see’’ because it would provide a measure of 32. We seek comment on the tentative behavior. certainty and confidence to conclusion that we will require use of 26. Although there are benefits to manufacturers, broadcasters and the ATSC DTV Standard. Assuming that required standards, there also may be consumers, thus helping assure a we do require the use of the ATSC DTV certain costs. One may be deterrence of smooth implementation of digital Standard by digital television licensees, technical innovations.18 Over time, we broadcast television and the we request comment on whether we expect that normal technological preservation of a free and universally should place the Standard into our rules progress will lead to improvements. If available broadcast television service. in its entirety or whether we should subsequent technological improvements 29. The digital television system that incorporate it by reference.22 cannot be readily incorporated into the has been recommended by the Advisory 33.While we propose to require digital ATSC DTV Standard, the Standard Committee appears to be dynamic, television licensees to use the ATSC could lock the broadcast market into flexible and high quality. It provides a DTV Standard, we recognize that the less than optimal technology. Required variety of picture formats that will allow benefits of a required standard may standards also may reduce some forms broadcasters to select the one most become attenuated over time, as the of competition while enhancing others. appropriate for their program material, costs of a requirement may increase. At With required standards, equipment ranging from very high resolution some point, when the new digital manufacturers cannot compete by providing the best possible picture broadcasting technology has become offering differentiated products using quality to multiple programs of lower firmly established, requirements different technologies. As such, a resolution, which could result in designed to promote certainty and to primary cost of required standards is increased choices for viewers. Even at foster a smooth implementation of loss of variety.19 On the other hand, the lower resolutions, the recommended digital television may no longer be required standards, which are licensed system represents a clear improvement necessary. Meanwhile, over time, the to everyone on a non-discriminatory over the current NTSC standard. likelihood increases that there will be basis, may intensify the more 30. Use of the ATSC DTV Standard technological innovation that even the conventional forms of competition, such also represents a rare opportunity to flexible ATSC DTV Standard may not be as price, service, and product features.20 increase significantly the efficient use of able to accommodate. In addition, given 27. As we weigh the benefits and broadcast spectrum. The ATSC DTV the pace of technological change, it is costs of required standards, we note that Standard will allow channels unusable likely that there will be unforeseeable for MMDS and new services like PCS, in the NTSC analog environment to be innovations that are incompatible with DBS, and DARS, we have decided to assigned for digital broadcasting the ATSC DTV Standard. As long as allow the marketplace to determine between existing NTSC channels. It was there is a requirement in our rules that transmission standards. We recognize designed to be flexible enough to DTV licensees use only the ATSC DTV that these decisions were made in a incorporate future improvements, Standard, such innovations could not be context different from that of terrestrial including those resulting in ever higher introduced to consumers without a broadcast television, an established resolution, that the Advisory Committee potentially costly and time-consuming industry upon which the American believes will be made possible by future Commission proceeding. That, in turn, advances in compression and display could reduce the incentive to conduct 18 For an overview of the characteristics of the technology. the research and development that leads television broadcast market that contribute to the 31. We believe that the ‘‘headroom’’ to innovation. inertia of established standards see Bruce M. Owen and Steven S. Wildman, Video Economics, (Harvard for innovation incorporated in the ATSC 34.In addition to ensuring that the University Press, 1992): 260–313. For a more DTV Standard, along with the Commission’s rules promote the rapid general discussion of the characteristics of one-way desirability of providing certainty and and two-way communications systems that affect confidence, argue in favor of a required 22 See Letter dated April 2, 1996, submitted for the adoption of technology see Michael L. Katz and standard. In addition, the flexibility of the record by Joseph P. Markoski of the law firm Carl Shapiro, ‘‘Systems Competition and Network of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey on behalf of the EIA Effects,’’ Journal of Economic Perspectives (Spring and the EIA Advanced Television Committee. The 1994): 93–115. 21 America’s Watching—Public Attitudes Toward letter cites as precedent for incorporating the 19 Katz and Shapiro, supra at 110. Television—1995, supra, at p. 3. Even nearly 60% standard into our Rules by reference Sections 20 Stanley M. Besen and Joseph Farrell, ‘‘Choosing of viewing in cable television households is of the 73.682(a)(14), 73.682(a)(21)(iv) and 15.31(a)(6) of How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in programming of broadcast television stations. the Commission’s Rules. A similar, but alternative, Standardization, Journal of Economic Perspectives NCTA, Cable Television Developments, Fall 1995, proposal would be to publish the Standard not in (Spring 1994): 117–131. at 5. our Rules but, rather, as an OET technical bulletin. 26868 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules introduction of digital television standard, including those the artistic quality of their work. They broadcasting, we seek in this proceeding Commission has previously identified: suggest, instead, that HDTV be to adopt rules that encourage further (1) authorizing use of a standard and displayed in a 2:1 aspect ratio. In reply, innovation by those who have devised prohibiting interference to it, but not the Society of Motion Picture and the ATSC DTV Standard as well as new requiring the use of that standard; 25 and Television Engineers (SMPTE) states entrants. We also seek to minimize our (2) adopting a standard for allocation that the 16:9 aspect ratio was regulations and to have the regulations and assignment purposes only.26 We established by the SMPTE Working that we do adopt remain in effect no also seek comment on requiring use of Group on High Definition Electronic longer than necessary. We are mindful, some layers of the ATSC DTV Standard Production in 1985 on the basis of finally, of the spirit of the recently (described more fully above) but making studies of the requirement for both adopted Telecommunications Act of others optional. For example, would it motion picture and television 1996, which seeks, ‘‘[t]o promote be desirable to require digital licensees production. Moreover, it states that the competition and reduce regulation in to use the RF/transmission layer of the value of 16:9 for aspect ratio was order to secure lower prices and higher ATSC DTV Standard, while leaving decided upon only after long debate and quality services for American them free to choose coding and that ‘‘due consideration was given to the telecommunications consumers and compression technologies different from then current practices both in North encourage the rapid deployment of new those described in the ATSC DTV America and around the world.’’ 30 telecommunications technologies.’’ 23 Standard? SMPTE states that it has been 35. There are several options that 40. Acceptability of the ATSC DTV demonstrated that there is no difficulty arguably could accomplish these goals Standard. Although the ATSC DTV in accommodating program material or and we propose to adopt one, or more Standard has many supporters, it also motion picture films of any reasonable than one in combination.24 The has its critics. Some in the computer aspect ratio within the 16:9 format and Commission could proceed under its industry argue that the presence of that material originally composed for a current processes for regulatory interlaced scanning formats, the 60 Hz 2:1 aspect ratio could be accommodated evolution and change, which include transmission rate, aspect ratios, by leaving 11% of the vertical space consideration, as appropriate, of colorimetry and non-square pixel unused.31 requests from parties to amend its rules spacing in the ATSC DTV Standard all 42. Additionally, we note that low and reviews initiated by the agency. merit further consideration.27 power television station (‘‘LPTV’’) 36. Alternatively, the Commission Proponents of the ATSC DTV Standard operators generally want to be included could commit itself to conduct a respond that the Standard was in the implementation of digital proceeding to review the Standard at developed for terrestrial broadcasting technology, and have suggested that, if some future time. If the Commission but has incorporated significant LPTV is excluded, its continued chooses this option, should a review be elements to enhance compatibility with viability would be jeopardized. LPTV 28 structured to place the burden of computers. With respect to the issue of commenters are concerned that any persuasion on those seeking to continue the presence of interlaced scanning in standards that could adversely affect requiring a standard or on those seeking the proposed Standard, the Grand their operations be thoroughly to eliminate the requirement? When Alliance argues that, ‘‘* * * the Grand documented in this proceeding.32 should such a review take place? Alliance HDTV system emphasizes 43. We seek comment on these issues. Should we select a specific date or progressive scan—five of the six HDTV We believe that those opposing our should we link the review to an formats are progressive scan, and the mandate of the ATSC DTV Standard objective event? Advisory Committee believes that the should have the burden of persuasion as 37. Finally, the Commission could lone interlaced format should be to why that standard should not be establish a period of time after which ‘migrated’ to progressive as soon as adopted. the ATSC DTV Standard no longer improvements in digital compression would be required or exclusive. At the and transmission technology make an V. Protection From Interference conclusion of some meaningful period over-1000 line, 60 Hz progressively 44. Protection from interference is a of time, digital licensees would be free scanned format achievable within a 6 fundamental Commission function that to use any technology that does not MHz terrestrial channel.’’ 29 must be considered when introducing interfere with users of the ATSC DTV 41. There also has been objection from new technologies into spectrum Standard. If such a sunset provision cinematographers to the 16:9 aspect allocations currently in use. In addition were to be adopted, how should we ratio contained in the ATSC DTV to criteria we will propose in the near determine when the mandatory aspects Standard. They are concerned that the future, when we propose an initial of our rules would expire? proposed Standard may limit Table of DTV Allotments and associated 38. Commenters are encouraged to broadcasters’ ability to display the full technical criteria, there are some comment on the foregoing and to interference-related aspects of the ATSC propose other options. In so doing, they 25 Second Inquiry, supra at 6535. DTV Standard that we shall explore should provide a thorough explanation 26 Id. 27 See Comments of Apple Computer, Inc., and now. In the following paragraphs, we of the benefits and detriments of their solicit comment on limitations on options and an explanation of how their Microsoft Corporation, in response to the Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making and Third stations using the ATSC DTV Standard options serve the goals that we have Notice of Inquiry in MM Docket No. 87–268 that might be needed to avoid outlined above. (‘‘Fourth Further Notice’’), 10 FCC Rcd 10540 39.Finally, we seek comment on (1995). 28 30 Letter of Stanley Baron, President, Society of alternative approaches to requiring a Letter of Stanley Baron, President, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers Motion Picture and Television Engineers, 18 August (‘‘SMPTE’’), 28 August 1995, at 2, Memo of Paul 1995, at 2. 23 Preamble to Pub. L. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 Misener, ACATS, to Fiona Branton, ITI (‘‘Misener 31 Id. at 3. In this regard it notes that there is a (1996). Memo’’), August 18, 1995, at 1–2. Reply Comments broad range of aspect ratios that has been employed 24 These options are not necessarily of the Digital HDTV Grand Alliance, in response to in modern times and that there is no single aspect incompatible. For example, we could adopt a sunset the Fourth Further Notice, at 38 and 40. ratio that is usable universally. provision but also provide for Commission review 29 Reply Comments of the HDTV Grand Alliance, 32 See, e.g., Comments of Abacus Television in of the Standard prior to the sunset. supra at 40. response to the Fourth Further Notice, at 24–25. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26869 objectionable interference to reception power will be different from the media and imaging systems, including of either existing NTSC service or the established NTSC procedures, which cable television, direct broadcast reception of other stations that use the determine the power transmitted during satellite, and computer systems. ATSC DTV Standard. each synchronizing pulse (peak power). 51. The working party and an 45. First, we propose to adopt an We propose that stations using the ‘‘interoperability review panel’’ also emission mask, limiting the out-of- ATSC DTV Standard would be allowed adopted a list of eleven characteristics channel emissions from a DTV station to determine their average power using critical to interoperability based on the transmitter, measured after any external conventional RMS averaging power needs and desires exhibited by filter that may be used and based on a meters. alternative media advocates.36 ACATS measurement bandwidth of 500 kHz. 48. We seek comment on all of the believes the Grand Alliance video We seek comment on the following foregoing including whether the system adequately addresses all eleven emission mask: (A) at the channel edge, proposed limits on out-of-channel factors and strikes the best balance emissions attenuated no less than 35 dB emissions, pilot carrier frequency between various technical below the average transmitted power; tolerance and average power considerations and needs of different (B) more than 6 MHz from the channel determination are appropriate and industries. It is a balance that has been edge, emissions attenuated no less than represent the minimum necessary endorsed by, among others, a subgroup 60 dB below the average transmitted requirements for controlling the of the Federal Government’s power; and (C) at any frequency interference potential of stations Information Infrastructure Task Force, between 0 and 6 MHz from the channel operating in conformance with the the 1994 NIST/ARPA Workshop on edge, emissions attenuated no less than ATSC DTV Standard. We also seek Advanced Digital Video, and the the value determined using the comment on whether the proposed Information Technology Industry following formula: limits are sufficient for this purpose, or Council (‘‘ITI’’).37 We request comment Attenuation in dB=35+[(∆f)2/1.44] if other parameters also need to be on the level of interoperability between Where: ∆f=frequency difference in MHz constrained. the ATSC DTV Standard and alternative from the edge of the channel 49. In addition to rules restricting media and on the ACATS Report’s This proposal is derived from analysis broadcast stations that relate to conclusion that it is adequate. Are there of the ACATS test results for protection interference concerns, there are many any critical interoperability problems of adjacent channel stations. The rules that establish procedures or have that remain? What additional actions, if attenuation level is based on an been applied broadly to all broadcast any, might the Commission take to assumption that the average DTV power stations. We propose to modify many of facilitate interoperability? We ask that in a 6 MHz channel is 12 dB less than them to include DTV, or to adapt them in commenting on this issue, the NTSC station effective radiated and create new DTV rules, as commenters provide specific technical power (ERP). This power difference appropriate so that eligible licensees or economic analyses upon which we provides approximately equal noise might move quickly to introduce this can make our decision. limited coverage for DTV and NTSC new technology to consumers. A 52. With digital technologies, stations in the UHF frequency band. If preliminary list of these technical and differences in transmission methods DTV stations are permitted to operate in procedural rules is attached as could develop between broadcast and a co-located adjacent channel Appendix A. We seek comment on alternative media if an appropriate arrangement with average DTV power whether they should be modified to variant of the ATSC DTV Standard is exceeding that assumed value, greater include DTV, be changed to treat DTV not required for alternative media. attenuation of the out-of-band emissions differently than NTSC or other There is no guarantee that alternative may be required. broadcast services are treated, or if they media will choose the ATSC DTV 46. Second, ACATS has reported need not be applied to DTV. Standard. In our Second Inquiry, we interference from an upper-adjacent Commenters addressing this issue expressed ‘‘our tentative view that ATV channel DTV signal to reception of an should provide specific compatibility among alternative media NTSC station that is related to the recommendations, rule-by-rule, as to the also may develop in an appropriate precise location of the DTV signal pilot modifications they advocate. manner without government carrier frequency.33 To prevent involvement.’’ 38 While we recognized VI. Interoperability interference to NTSC receivers from this that there may be benefits to source, we are proposing to require an 50. Cross-Industry Interoperability. compatibility, we added that ‘‘we do not ATSC DTV Standard station pilot Compatibility with other transmission intend to retard the introduction of ATV frequency to be located 5.082138 MHz forms and media applications has been on non-broadcast media, nor do we above the visual carrier of the lower an important issue throughout this intend at this point to require adjacent channel NTSC station. The proceeding. Since its inception, ACATS compatibility among the various media above stated frequency difference emphasized the need for DTV or set specific signal or equipment between the NTSC visual carrier and the broadcasting technology to be DTV VSB pilot would need to be interoperable with alternative media.35 36 ACATS Report, Appendix I. maintained within a tolerance of ±3 In addition, ACATS has recognized that 37 ACATS Report at 16. See also Information Hz.34 interoperability takes on critical Technology Industry Council, ‘‘Position Statement importance given the future needs for on Standards for Advanced Television,’’ October 47. Third, we propose to specify the 31, 1995, at 1–2. We note that subsequently ITI maximum power for each DTV station high resolution digital imagery and the stated that the ATSC DTV Standard ‘‘will be an as an average power across the occupied development of a National Information important part of a diverse and flexible NII’’ and bandwidth, so an appropriate method or Infrastructure. ACATS believes that the ‘‘urges the Commission to promptly adopt and ATSC DTV Standard is suitably implement’’ it, but without the interlace options, methods of determining operating stating that it believes ‘‘a truly interoperable ATV interoperable with other video delivery system will require the exclusive use of progressive 33 ACATS Final Technical Report at 5.2.8. scan.’’ See Comments of the Industry Information 34 See Annex to ACATS Report, Record of Test 35 This description of the ACATS position on Technology Industry Council filed in response to Results for Digital HDTV Grand Alliance System interoperability is largely derived from the ACATS the Fourth Further Notice, at 2–3. (October 1995), at I–14–67. Report at 15–16. 38 Second Inquiry, supra at 6537. 26870 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules standards for this purpose.’’ 39 We seek Receiver Act or otherwise in the public the Advisory Committee’s testing comment on whether this view remains interest.41 procedures have required proponents of correct. 55. Now, however, we have the ATSC any DTV system to follow American 53. In the Cable Television Consumer DTV Standard before us. In Annex E, it National Standards Institute patent Protection and Competition Act of 1992 indicates that our current TV rules policies which require assurance that: (1992 Cable Act), Congress expressed should be appropriate for the digital TV (1) a license will be made available concern about compatibility between service with respect to tuner without compensation to applicants consumer electronics equipment and performance, direct pickup and closed desiring to utilize the license for the 42 purpose of implementing the standard; cable systems.40 We are aware of captioning. It notes that a 10 dB ‘‘noise or (2) a license will be made available concern within the broadcast industry figure’’ was used for spectrum planning to applicants under reasonable terms that, for example, cable systems may purposes and it expects that value to be and conditions that are demonstrably voluntarily adopt QAM modulation in appropriate. Additionally, the ATSC free of any unfair discrimination.47 We lieu of VSB modulation specified in the DTV Standard indicates that any decoder interface standards we adopt seek comment on whether we should ATSC DTV Standard. Some cable for NTSC ‘‘cable-ready’’ receivers in ET require more detailed information on system operators suggest deploying a Docket No. 93–7 will almost certainly the specific terms, if any, for patenting DTV system that does not use B-frames. provide a basis for rules concerning this and licensing the ATSC DTV Standard. While we understand that technical aspect of digital TV receivers.43 In its 57. International Trade. We recognize distinctions between broadcast and Final Report, the Technical Subgroup of that other countries may choose other cable may at some extreme cause ACATS recommended that the digital television systems that they feel consumer harm, we also recognize that Commission require that receivers (and more appropriately meet their needs, it is in the economic interests of the set-top boxes designed to receive ATV expectations or national priorities. Their providers to ensure consumers have broadcasts for display on NTSC sets) be systems may well be incompatible with access to the most desirable able to receive adequately all DTV the ATSC DTV Standard. Would our programming. Today, nearly 60 percent formats.44 In response to the Fourth proposal here serve to enhance of cable viewing hours are spent Further Notice, some commenters competitiveness of a U.S. system watching broadcast programming, much expressed concerned that such a worldwide and what are the benefits of which is provided under requirement might have a large effect on associated with such a result? Will a retransmission consent agreements. In either reception quality or receiver requirement to use the ATSC DTV light of these concerns, we seek costs.45 We request comment on the Standard as the sole authorized system comment on whether the public interest importance of this requirement for exacerbate or enhance the opportunities would be served by Commission compatibility between receivers and of U.S. based content providers, involvement to assure compatibility broadcast signals. What level of equipment manufacturers or other between digital broadcast standards and reception performance should be parties? Additionally, to increase digital cable standards. Similarly, there considered adequate? Given our international compatibility, the Grand would appear to be advantages and proposal that licensees must use the Alliance adopted the MPEG–2 video disadvantages to Commission ATSC DTV Standard, is such a stream syntax for encoding of video and involvement to assure compatibility requirement necessary? We seek the MPEG–2 transport stream syntax for between other existing and potential comment on necessary adjustments to the packetization and multiplexing of competing video delivery methods, the existing TV receiver rules so that video, audio and data signals. Should including DBS, MMDS, Instructional they cover digital TV receivers. we pursue additional measures to Television Fixed Service (‘‘ITFS’’) and 56. Licensing Technology. We have facilitate international compatibility? open video systems. We seek comment previously stated that in order for DTV 58. Captioning. Section 305 of the on the considerations that apply in implementation to be fully realized, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 48 these different environments. patents on a DTV standard would have requires the Commission, within 18 to be licensed to other manufacturing months after the date of enactment of VII. Other Issues companies on reasonable and the Telecom Act, to prescribe 46 regulations to assure that video 54. Receiver Standards and Related nondiscriminatory terms. In response, programming is fully accessible through Features. In the Fourth Further Notice, 41 the provision of closed captions. The we solicited comment on whether DTV Id. at 10552. 42 ATSC DTV Standard at 61–64. Note that it ATSC DTV Standard reserves a fixed receivers should be required to have the describes ‘‘appropriate’’ as meaning that the 9600 bits-per-second data rate for closed ability to receive both SDTV and HDTV existing rules for NTSC which are referenced captioning.49 We understand that EIA’s transmissions, whether we should contain most elements of future rules for digital R4.3 Subcommittee on TV Data Systems regulate how such signals should be television and, further, the rules may be expanded to cover digital television. is considering a standard to define the displayed and whether permitting the 43 First Report and Order in ET Docket No. 93– syntax for the data, as well as the issue manufacture only of ‘‘all format’’ 7, supra. Although the Commission adopted of how to include closed captioning requirements for television receivers to be marketed receivers capable of displaying NTSC, information for multichannel SDTV SDTV and HDTV signals would be as ‘‘cable-ready,’’ an open issue in that proceeding is a standard for a decoder interface. transmissions. Any comments parties consistent with the All-Channel 44 ACATS Report at 20. may have concerning the ability of DTV 45 See, e.g., Comments of the Electronic Industries to include captioning and how the 39 Id. Association and the Advanced Television Commission should implement 40 See Cable Television Consumer Protection and Committee at 16. See also Comments of Zenith Competition Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102–385, 106 Electronics Corporation at 4. Stat. 1460, (1992). Section 17 of the 1992 Cable Act 46 Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket 87–268, 7 added a new Section 624A to the Communications No. 87–268, 6 FCC Rcd 7024, 7035 (1991); Second FCC Rcd 6924, 6982 (1992). Act of 1934, which has been implemented by First Report and Order/Further Notice of Proposed Rule 47 Advisory Committee ATV Test Procedures Test Report and Order in ET Docket No. 93–7, 9 FCC Making in MM Docket No. 87–268, 7 FCC Rcd 3340, Management Plan at § 2.1. Rcd 1981 (1994). Section 301 of the Telecom Act, 3358 (1992); Memorandum Opinion and Order/ 48 Pub. L. No. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). in turn, has modified Section 624A. Third Report and Order/Third Further Notice of 49 ATSC DTV Standard at 26. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26871 captioning requirements for DTV may III. Legal Basis 63. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the be filed in response to this Further Authority for this action may be Commission has prepared an Initial Notice. found at 47 U.S.C. §§ 154 and 303. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) Administrative Matters IV. Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other of the expected impact on small entities 59. Pursuant to applicable procedures Compliance Requirements of the proposals suggested in this set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of Such requirements are not proposed document. The IRFA is set forth above. the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. in this phase of the proceeding, but may Written public comments are requested Sections 1.415 and 1.419, interested be raised and comment sought in future on the IRFA. These comments must be parties may file comments on or before decisions in this proceeding. filed in accordance with the same filing 45 days after publication in the Federal deadlines as comments on the rest of the Register, and reply comments on or V. Federal Rules Which Overlap, Notice, but they must have a separate before 30 days after comments are due. Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules and distinct heading designating them To file formally in this proceeding, you There are no rules which would as responses to the Initial Regulatory must file an original plus six copies of overlap, duplicate, or conflict with these Flexibility Analysis. The Secretary shall all comments, reply comments, and rules. send a copy of this Fifth Further Notice supporting comments. If you want each of Proposed Rule Making, including the Commissioner to receive a personal VI. Description, Potential Impact and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, copy of your comments, you must file Number of Small Entities Involved to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the an original plus eleven copies. You There are approximately 1,546 UHF Small Business Administration in should send comments and reply and VHF, commercial and educational accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the comments to Office of the Secretary, television stations, 2,587 UHF translator Regulatory Flexibility Act. Public Law Federal Communications Commission, stations, 2,275 VHF translator stations, 96–354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. Section 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. and 1,825 UHF and VHF low power 601 et seq. (1981). 20554. Comments and reply comments television stations which would be Federal Communications Commission. will be available for public inspection affected by decisions reached in this William F. Caton, during regular business hours in the proceeding. The impact of actions taken Acting Secretary. FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 in this proceeding on small entities M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. would ultimately depend on the final Appendix A 60. This is a non-restricted notice and decisions taken by the Commission. Additional procedural or general comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex However, the Commission, in taking broadcast rules that may be modified or parte presentations are permitted, future action will continue to balance adapted for DTV. except during the Sunshine Agenda the need to provide the public with period, provided they are disclosed as Sec. affordable, flexible, accessible digital 73.607 Availability of channels. provided in the Commission Rules. See broadcast television service with the 73.611 Reference points and distance generally 47 C.F.R. Sections 1.1202, economic and administrative interests computations. 1.1203, and 1.1206(a). of the affected industries. 73.612 Protection from interference. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act 73.615 Administrative changes in VII. Any Significant Alternatives authorizations. Statement Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities 73.621 Noncommercial educational TV I. Reason for Action Consistent with Stated Objectives. stations. 73.635 Use of common antenna site. The Commission seeks comment on a This Fifth Further Notice of Proposed 73.684 Prediction of coverage. variety of issues concerning whether to Rule Making is intended to examine the 73.685 Transmitter location and antenna adopt a technical standard for digital issue of what, if any, transmission system. television and, if so, whether that standard for digital television should be 73.686 Field strength measurements. standard should be the one reported to adopted by the Commission. In so 73.688 Indicating instruments. doing, we are soliciting comments and 73.1010 Cross reference to rules in other the Commission by the Advisory parts. Committee on Advanced Television suggestions that hopefully will 73.1015 Truthful written statements and Systems. represent the views of all of the responses to Commission inquiries and industries concerned, and thus the II. Objectives of the Action correspondence. Commission will be better able to 73.1030 Notifications concerning The Fifth Further Notice of Proposed minimize whatever negative impact interference to radio astronomy, research Rule Making solicits comment on a might face small entities as a result of and receiving installations. variety of issues, in order to establish an our decisions. 73.1120 Station location. accurate, comprehensive, reliable record 73.1125 Station main studio location. Ordering Clause 73.1201 Station identification. on which to base the Commission’s 73.1202 Retention of letters received from ultimate decisions in this proceeding. 61. Accordingly, it is ordered That the public. The record established from comments pursuant to the authority contained in 73.1206 Broadcast of telephone filed in response to this decision, as Sections 4 and 303 of the conversations. well as other Commission decisions, Communications Act of 1934, as 73.1207 Rebroadcasts. and the combined efforts of the amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154 and 73.1208 Broadcast of taped, filmed, or Commission, the affected industries, the 303, this Fifth Further Notice of recorded material. Advisory Committee on Advanced Proposed Rule Making IS ADOPTED. 73.1209 References to time. 73.1211 Broadcast of lottery information. Television Service, and the DTV testing 62. Additional Information: For 73.1212 Sponsorship identification; list process, will lead to implementation of additional information regarding this retention; related requirements. DTV in the most harmonious fashion proceeding, contact Saul Shapiro (202– 73.1213 Antenna structure, marking and and to selection of the most desirable 418–2600) or Roger Holberg (202–418– lighting. DTV system. 2134), Mass Media Bureau. 73.1216 Licensee-conducted contests. 26872 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

73.1217 Broadcast hoaxes. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Service, 2100 K Street, NW., 73.1225 Station inspections by FCC. Washington, D.C. The meeting of May 73.1226 Availability to FCC of station logs National Highway Traffic Safety 29 is scheduled for noon to 5:00 p.m. and records. Administration The meeting of May 30 will be from 9:00 73.1230 Posting of station and operator a.m. to 5:00 p.m. licenses. 49 CFR Part 571 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 73.1250 Broadcasting emergency Jere [Docket No. 95±28; Notice 7] information. Medlin, Office of Vehicle Safety 73.1510 Experimental authorizations. RIN 2127±AF73 Standards, NHTSA (Phone: 202–366– 73.1515 Special field test authorizations. 5276; FAX: 202–366–4329). Mediator: 73.1520 Operation for tests and Lamps, Reflective Devices and Lynn Sylvester, Federal Mediation and maintenance. Associated Equipment; Advisory Conciliation Service, (phone: 202–606– 73.1580 Transmission system inspections. Committee on Regulatory Negotiation 9140; FAX: 202–606–3679). 73.1590 Equipment performance Public Meeting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final measurements. meetings of the Advisory Committee on AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 73.1610 Equipment tests. Regulatory Negotiation (concerning the Safety Administration (NHTSA); DOT. 73.1615 Operation during modification of improvement of headlamp aimability facilities. ACTION: Schedule of Advisory performance and visual/optical 73.1620 Program tests. Committee on Regulatory Negotiation headlamp aiming) will be held on May 73.1635 Special temporary authorizations Meeting. 29–30, at which time it is anticipated (STA). that final consensus will be reached on 73.1660 Acceptability of broadcast SUMMARY: This document announces the transmitters. final meetings of NHTSA’s Advisory a notice of proposed rulemaking on the 73.1665 Main transmitters. Committee on Regulatory Negotiation subject of the negotiations. 73.1670 Auxiliary transmitters. (concerning the improvement of The meetings are open to the public. 73.1675 Auxiliary antennas. headlamp aimability performance and Issued: May 24, 1996. [FR Doc. 96–13394 Filed 5–28–96; 8:45 am] visual/optical headlamp aiming). Barry Felrice, DATES: BILLING CODE 6712±01±P Wednesday-Thursday, May 29– Associate Administrator for Safety 30, 1996. Performance Standards. ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at [FR Doc. 96–13556 Filed 5–24–96; 12:33 pm] the Federal Mediation and Conciliation BILLING CODE 4910±59±P