Browse: Departments Dates Agencies
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Treasury Department
CFR Citation: 47 CFR Part 76
Docket ID: [MB Docket No. 05-49; FCC 05-24]
NOTICE: Part II
DOCUMENT ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUBJECT CATEGORY: AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
DATES: Submit comments on or before April 8, 2005; and reply comments must be filed on or before April 29, 2005. Written comments on the proposed information collection requirements contained in the document must be submitted by the public, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before May 9, 2005.
DOCUMENT SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission proposes rules to implement
Section 202 of the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 (``SHVERA''), which creates Section 340 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Act''), and amends the
copyright laws in order to provide satellite carriers with the
authority to offer Commissiondetermined ``significantlyviewed''
signals of outofmarket broadcast stations to subscribers. This
document achieves the SHVERA's statutory objectives to publish and
maintain a list of the stations and the communities containing such
stations that are eligible for ``significantly viewed'' status; and
commence a rulemaking proceeding to implement new Section 340.
SUMMARY: Federal Communications Commission,
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
This is a summary of the Federal Communications Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM'') FCC 0524, adopted on February 4, 2005, and released on February 7, 2005. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CYA257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CYB402, Washington, DC 20554. To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 4180530 (voice), (202) 4180432 (TTY).Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
This NPRM has been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''), Public Law. 10413, 109 Stat 163 (1995), and contains proposed information collection requirements. It will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the OMB to comment on the proposed information collection requirements contained in this NPRM, as required by the PRA. Written comments on the PRA proposed information collection requirements must be submitted by the public, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before May 9, 2005. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, (``SBPRA''), Public Law 107198, 116 Stat 729 (2002), see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), comments should also address how the Commission might ``further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
The following existing information collection requirements would be modified if the proposed rules contained in the NPRM are adopted.
OMB Control Number: 30600311.
Title: 47 CFR 76.54, Significantly Viewed Signals; Method to be Followed for Special Showings.
Form Number: Not Applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.
Number of Respondents: 250.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Estimated Time Per Response: 115 hours (average).
Total Annual Burden: 4,610 hours.
Total Annual Costs: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 76.54(c) is used to notify interested
parties, including licensees or permittees of television broadcast
stations, about audience surveys that are being conducted by an
organization to demonstrate that a particular broadcast station is
eligible for significantly viewed status under the Commission's rules.
The notifications provide interested parties with an opportunity to
review survey methodologies and file objections. The proposed Sec.
76.54(c) retains the existing notification requirement, but, if
adopted, would increase the potential number of parties that would file
such notifications. 47 CFR 76.54(e) and (f), if adopted, would be used
to notify television broadcast stations about the retransmission of
significantly viewed signals by a satellite carrier into these stations' local market.
OMB Control Number: 30600888.
Title: Part 76, Multichannel Video and Cable Television Service; Pleading and Complaint Rules; 47 CFR 76.7 Petition Procedures.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.
Number of Respondents: 500.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
[[Page 11315]]
Estimated Time Per Response: 440 hours (average).
Total Annual Burden: 11,000 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $2,000,000.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 76.7 is used to make determinations on
petitions and complaints filed with the Commission. The proposed rule
changes, if adopted, would expand the potential number of parties and
situations that may require the filing of Sec. 76.7 petitions. Parties
(cable operators and broadcast stations) are currently permitted to
file Sec. 76.7 petitions (with audience surveys) to demonstrate
significantly viewed status under rule Sec. 76.54. The proposed rule
changes, if adopted, would authorize additional parties (satellite carriers) to file such Sec. 76.7 petitions to demonstrate
significantly viewed status under new Section 340 of the Act. Moreover,
the proposed rule changes, if adopted, would authorize parties to file
Sec. 76.7 petitions in order to file a complaint under the Section 340 enforcement provisions.
OMB Control Number: 30600960.
Title: 47 CFR 76.122, Satellite Network Nonduplication Protection
Rules; 47 CFR 76.123, Satellite Syndicated Program Exclusivity Rules;
47 CFR 76.124, Requirements for Invocation of Nonduplication and
Syndicated Exclusivity Protection; 47 CFR 76.127, Satellite Sports Blackout Rules.
Form Number: Not Applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.
Number of Respondents: 1,428.
Estimated Time Per Response: 0.51 hour (average).
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 68,529 hours.
Total Annual Costs: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 76.122, 76.123, 76.124 and 76.127 are used
to protect exclusive contract rights negotiated between broadcasters,
distributors, and rights holders for the transmission of network,
syndicated, and sports programming in the broadcasters' recognized
market areas. The proposed rule changes to Sec. Sec. 76.122 and
76.123, if adopted, would implement statutory requirements to provide
new rights for inmarket stations to assert nonduplication and
exclusivity rights, potentially increasing the number of filings
pursuant to these rules. No changes to Sec. Sec. 76.124 and 76.127 are proposed.
Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM''), the Commission proposes rules to implement Section 202 of the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 (``SHVERA''), Pub. L. No. 108447, sec. 202, 118 Stat 2809, 3393 (2004) (to be codified at 47 U.S.C. 340). (The SHVERA was enacted on December 8, 2004 as title IX of the ``Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005.'' This proceeding is one of a number of Commission proceedings that will be required to implement the SHVERA. The other proceedings will follow according to the timeframes set forth in the SHVERA, to be undertaken and largely completely in 2005; see Sections 202, 204, 205, 207, 208, 209 and 210 of the SHVERA; see also public notice, ``Media Bureau Seeks Comment For Inquiry Required By the on Rules Affecting Competition In the Television Marketplace,'' MB Docket No. 0528, DA 05169 (rel. Jan. 25, 2005).) Section 202 of the SHVERA creates Section 340 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'' or ``Act''), which provides satellite carriers with the authority to offer Commissiondetermined ``significantly viewed'' signals of outofmarket (or ``distant'') broadcast stations to subscribers. The SHVERA imposes strict statutory deadlines, directing the Commission to (1) publish and maintain a list of stations eligible for ``significantly viewed'' status and the related communities (as determined by the Commission), and (2) commence a rulemaking proceeding to implement Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, both within 60 days, thus enabling satellite carriage of such ``significantly viewed'' signals. The SHVERA was enacted by Presidential signature on December 8, 2004. The SHVERA also requires that the Commission adopt rules implementing Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, within one year of the statute's enactment. Section 340(h) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(h), directs the Commission to make specific revisions to Sec. 76.66 of our rules, 47 CFR 76.66, with respect to carriage elections, retransmission consent negotiations and notifications to stations in localintolocal markets no later than October 30, 2005. These revisions will be addressed in a separate proceeding.)
2. With the SHVERA, Congress takes another step toward ``moderniz[ing] satellite television policy and enhanc[ing] competition between satellite and cable operators.'' The SHVERA adopts for satellite carriers and subscribers the concept of ``significantly viewed,'' which has applied in the cable context for more than 30 years. In 1972, the Commission adopted the concept of ``significantly viewed'' signals to differentiate between outofmarket television stations ``that have sufficient audience to be considered local and those that do not.'' The Commission concluded at that time that it would not be reasonable if choices on cable were more limited than choices over the air, and gave cable carriage rights to stations in communities where they had significant overtheair noncable viewing. (At the time the Commission adopted the significantly viewed rules, the cable television carriage rules were generally based on mileage zones from the relevant stations. A television station was generally considered ``local'' for cable carriage purposes if the relevant community served was within 35 miles of the station's city of license or within its Grade B contour but not within the 35 mile zone of another market. Cable system carriage of significantly viewed stations, however, was based on audience viewership levels in the relevant communities rather than by strict mileage zones. This afforded significantly viewed stations carriage when they otherwise would have been considered distant stations, 47 CFR 76.5(i), 47 CFR 76.5(i).) The designation is salient because it has enabled stations assigned to one market to be treated as ``local'' stations with respect to a particular cable community in another market.
3. The copyright provisions that apply to cable systems have
recognized the Commission's designation of stations as ``significantly
viewed'' and treated them, for copyright purposes, as ``local,'' and
therefore subject to reduced copyright payment obligations. The
copyright provisions governing satellite carriers did not, however,
provide a statutory copyright license for significantly viewed signals,
and as a consequence such signals are not, as a practical matter,
generally available for carriage for satellite distribution outside of
their Designated Market Areas (``DMAs''). Recognizing that the reach of
a station's overtheair signal is not constrained by the boundary of a
DMA, the SHVERA now will allow a satellite carrier to treat an
otherwise distant signal as ``local'' in a community where such signal
is ``significantly viewed'' by consumers in that community. (A DMA
generally identifies a television station's ``local market.''). In this
way, the statutory provisions governing satellite carriage of broadcast stations move
[[Page 11316]]
closer to the provisions that have long governed cable carriage. II. Background
A. Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA)
4. In 1988, Congress passed the Satellite Home Viewer Act (``1988 SHVA''), which established a statutory copyright license for satellite carriers to offer subscribers who could not receive the signal of a broadcast station over the air access to broadcast programming via satellite. The 1988 SHVA reflected Congress' intent to protect the role of local broadcasters in providing overtheair television by limiting satellite delivery of network broadcast programming to subscribers who were ``unserved'' by overtheair signals. The 1988 SHVA, however, did permit satellite carriers to offer distant ``superstations'' to subscribers.
B. Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (SHVIA)
5. In the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (``SHVIA''), Congress expanded on the 1988 SHVA by amending both the 1988 copyright laws and the Communications Act to permit satellite carriers to retransmit local broadcast television signals directly to consumers. Generally, the SHVIA sought to level the competitive playing field between satellite and cable operators, thereby providing consumers with more and better choices when selecting a multichannel video programming distributor (``MVPD''). The Commission undertook a number of rulemakings to implement the SHVIA, adopting rules for satellite companies with regard to mandatory carriage of broadcast signals, retransmission consent, and program exclusivity that closely paralleled the requirements for cable service.
6. A key element of the SHVIA was to provide satellite carriers
with a statutory copyright license to facilitate the retransmission of
local broadcast programming, or ``localintolocal'' service, to
subscribers. A satellite carrier provides ``localintolocal'' service
when it retransmits a local television signal back into the local
market of that television station for reception by subscribers.
Generally, a television station's ``local market'' is the DMA in which
it is located. (Section 340(i)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(i)(1), as
established by the SHVERA, defines the term ``local market'' using the
definition contained in 17 U.S.C. 122(j)(2).) DMAs, which describe each
television market in terms of a unique geographic area, are established
by Nielsen Media Research based on measured viewing patterns. Each
satellite carrier providing localintolocal service pursuant to the
statutory copyright license is generally obligated to carry any
qualified local television station in the particular DMA that has made
a timely election for mandatory carriage, unless the station's
programming is duplicative of the programming of another station
carried by the carrier in the DMA or the station does not provide a
good quality signal to the carrier's local receive facility. This is
commonly referred to as the ``carry one, carry all'' requirement; see 47 U.S.C. 338.
C. Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 (SHVERA)
7. In December 2004, Congress passed and the President signed the
Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, which
again amends the 1988 copyright laws and the Communications Act to
further aid the competitiveness of satellite carriers and expand
program offerings for satellite subscribers; see the Satellite Home
Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108447,
118 Stat 2809, 3393 (2004) (codified in scattered sections of 17 and 47
U.S.C.). Section 102 of the SHVERA creates a new 17 U.S.C. 119(a)(3) to
provide satellite carriers with a statutory copyright license to offer
``significantly viewed'' signals as part of their local service
subscribers. The 1999 SHVIA opened the door for satellite carriers to
offer local broadcast programming to subscribers, but the SHVIA
copyright license for satellite carriers was still more limited than
the statutory copyright license for cable operators. Specifically, for satellite purposes, ``local,'' though outofmarket (i.e.,
``significantly viewed'') signals were treated the same as truly
``distant'' (e.g., hundreds of miles away) signals for purposes of the
SHVIA's statutory copyright licenses in 17 U.S.C. 119 and 122. The
SHVERA is intended to correct this particular inconsistency by giving
satellite carriers the option to offer Commissiondetermined ``significantly viewed'' signals to subscribers.
III. Discussion
8. The SHVERA creates Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, and expands the statutory copyright license for satellite carriers contained in 17 U.S.C. 119 to establish the framework for satellite carriage of Commissiondetermined ``significantly viewed'' signals. As required by the SHVERA, we open this rulemaking proceeding, publish the existing list of significantly viewed stations, and seek comment on implementation of Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, and on the specific rule proposals and tentative conclusions contained herein. A. Station Eligibility for Satellite Carriage as ``Significantly Viewed''
9. In this section, we will consider which stations are eligible for ``significantly viewed'' status in which communities pursuant to the statutory copyright license contained in 17 U.S.C. 119(a). We will also consider how stations and the related communities can become eligible for such status. Such examination requires discussion of the interplay of the Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, requirements with the Commission's network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity rules. We must also consider how to define a satellite community in this context.
1. ``Significantly Viewed'' Status
10. The SHVERA specifies two ways for a station to be eligible for
``significantly viewed'' status. Section 340(a) of the Act, as created
by the SHVERA, authorizes a satellite carrier ``to retransmit to a
subscriber located in a community the signal of any station located
outside the local market in which such subscriber is located, to the extent such signal
(1) Has, before the date of enactment of the Satellite Home
Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, been determined by
the Federal Communications Commission to be a signal a cable
operator may carry as significantly viewed in such community, except
to the extent that such signal is prevented from being carried by a
cable system in such community under the Commission's network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity rules; or
(2) Is, after such date of enactment, determined by the Commission to be significantly viewed in such community in
accordance with the same standards and procedures concerning shares
of viewing hours and audience surveys as are applicable under the
rules, regulations, and authorizations of the Commission to
determining with respect to a cable system whether signals are significantly viewed in a community.''
Therefore, to obtain ``significantly viewed'' status, a station
must either (1) be determined by the Commission to be ``significantly
viewed,'' as of December 7, 2004 (i.e., must be on the Commission's
``Significantly Viewed List'' or ``SV List''), or (2) obtain a
``significantly viewed'' determination by the Commission (i.e., must be
added to the ``Significantly Viewed List''). There is no statutory
limit on the number of significantly viewed signals a satellite carrier may carry.
[[Page 11317]]
2. List of Significantly Viewed Stations and Communities
11. Section 340(c) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(c), directs the Commission to publish and maintain a unified list of significantly viewed stations, and the communities containing such stations, that will apply to both cable operators and satellite carriers. The provision also requires that the Commission make this list of significantly viewed stations with related communities available to the public on our Web site, and update this list within 10 business days after taking an action to modify the list. (At the completion of this rulemaking proceeding, the final list will be published on the Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov/mb, and, as further required by SHVERA, we will update the list as it appears on the website within 10 days of any modifications.)
12. In accordance with the SHVERA, we have compiled a list of stations that have been granted significantly viewed status pursuant to the Commission's cable television rules. This list (``SV List''), attached as Appendix B, is a list of significantly viewed stations and the communities containing such stations combining the Commission's original 1972 list of significantly viewed stations granted on a countywide basis with stations added on a county or communitywide basis over the intervening years. (The Commission's initial list of significantly viewed stations was released in 1972. The SV List also includes stations granted significantly viewed status subsequent to 1972. These latter stations and communities have not been previously published by the Commission, but have been included in a list maintained and published annually in Warren Publishing's Cable & Station Coverage Atlas (Warren Publishing Inc., Washington DC). The most recent version of Warren Communications News' significantly viewed list can be found at: Cable and Station Coverage Atlas, Warren Communications News' (Appendix B) (2004). The SV List indicates by a plus sign (+) those that have been added to the 1972 list after its publication to distinguish them from those stations and communities derived from the original 1972 list. We do not believe that this distinction is meaningful for the future and intend to eliminate this designation from the final SV List to be published at the conclusion of this proceeding.) When the Commission initiated the cable carriage rules in 1972, the goal was to be broadly inclusive in order to provide a wide range of programming choices for cable viewers by designating significantly viewed stations on a countywide basis. The Commission provided that, after this initial period, stations can be added to the list on the basis of community surveys that focus on the area in which the station is significantly viewed. In addition, stations beginning operation after the initial survey period can use the countywide methodology comparable to that used by Arbitron for the initial survey in lieu of a communitybased survey.
13. As explained below, some stations on the SV List have been the subject of waivers and program deletions based on network
nonduplication or syndicated exclusivity. The SV List indicates by a
pound sign (
14. Based on the short time frame mandated by the SHVERA for publication of the SV List, as well as the legislative history, we believe that Congress intends for satellite carriers to make use of the SV List to expand their carriage offerings so that their subscribers can begin to experience the benefits of the SHVERA as soon as possible. We are confident that the SV List appended to this NPRM has a high degree of accuracy and, therefore, believe that both cable and satellite carriers may rely on its validity to commence service, consistent with the other requirements set out in the SHVERA and this proceeding, prior to the adoption of a final list. Nevertheless, in light of the length and age of the SV List, we are asking all interested parties to review the SV List to confirm its accuracy. We seek comment here only about whether the SV List accurately reflects such existing significantly viewed determinations, and not about whether the SV List should be modified because of a change in a station's circumstances subsequent to its placement on the SV List. (We are publishing the SV List in accordance with the SHVERA's mandate in new Section 340(c)(1)(A)(i), 47 U.S.C. 340(c)(1)(A)(i). The purpose of this SV List is to identify ``the stations that are eligible'' for significantly viewed status, meaning those stations already determined to be significantly viewed by the Commission. The House Commerce Committee intended that the Commission publish the SV List within 180 days of enactment, and provided for ``interim eligibility'' for stations on the list. The intent was for satellite carriers to ``start carrying the signals on the list pending adoption of the rules.'' Although the ``interim eligibility'' language did not survive, the enacted provision required even faster publication of the SV List (i.e., within 60 days). We believe this indicates Congress' interest in permitting immediate use of the SV List upon publication. As discussed below in Section III.A.3, the SHVERA provides for a mechanism for parties to subsequently seek modification of the SV List. Requests to modify the SV List based on changed circumstances must follow this process. Parties may file comments in response to this NPRM describing the nature and basis of any error, including changes in call sign or community. Such comments must include documentary evidence supporting the requested correction. If we find that a station or community has been listed in error, carriage of such signals in such communities will no longer be permitted pursuant to the significantly viewed provisions pertaining to satellite carriers. We believe, however, that carriage instituted in reliance on the SV List, and otherwise in compliance with the SHVERA and the Commission's rules, should not be treated as a ``bad faith'' violation, notwithstanding a subsequent conclusion that the SV List was in error.
15. With respect to the SV List, we seek specific comment on how to
treat communities listed as ``unincorporated areas,'' as well as how to
treat communities that have grown or changed over time, either through
annexation or other means. We tentatively conclude that community
listings or descriptions should generally be interpreted to encompass
the area of natural growth of the community, such that we would apply
the community description on the SV List to the community so
denominated today. We recognize, however, that unincorporated areas
present a somewhat more difficult problem because they may not be as
clearly defined as are incorporated areas. We seek comment on how best to resolve treatment of unincorporated areas.
3. Procedures for Determining or Modifying Significantly Viewed Status
16. Section 340(c) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(c), provides a
procedure for modifying the SV List, either to add eligible stations or
communities, or restrict use of eligible stations through application
of the Commission's network nonduplication or syndicated exclusivity
rules. This provision permits a satellite carrier or station to petition the Commission to include a particular
[[Page 11318]]
station and related community on the significantly viewed list. Section
119(a)(3) of the copyright provisions in title 17, 17 U.S.C. 119(a)(3),
requires that the Commission use the same rules in considering such
petitions that were in effect as of April 15, 1976. Therefore, it is
necessary to describe the existing rules and propose how they will be amended to implement the requirements of the SHVERA.
17. The Commission adopted the significantly viewed standard in 1972. The rules that set the standard also established the definition of ``full network,'' ``partial network,'' and ``independent'' station; see 47 CFR 76.5(i), (j), (k), and (l). The standard applies only to over the air viewing and only to commercial stations. As discussed below, these definitions differ from the copyright definition of ``network station'' and must be harmonized for our implementation of the SHVERA requirements. The Commission's rules provide that an outof market network affiliate should be considered to be significantly viewed if it obtains at least a three percent share of viewing hours in television homes in the community and has a net weekly circulation share of at least 25 percent. For independent stations, the test is a share of at least two percent viewing hours and a net weekly circulation of at least five percent. In 1972, the Commission used 1971 American Research Bureau (ARB) information to establish a baseline list of significantly viewed signals. This data provided audience statistics on a county basis. Although the Commission recognized some drawbacks in using this information, it concluded that county audience statistics could be used to indicate overtheair viewing in all communities within a county. This list of significantly viewed signals is referred to as the ``1972 Appendix B'' list. To avoid disruption and uncertainty, the Commission stated that the stations deemed significantly viewed based on the ARB survey are not subject to deletion on the basis of some special showing or later survey.
18. In the 1972 Order, the Commission also established procedures for qualifying new signals for significantly viewed status. Under Sec. 76.54 of the rules, 47 CFR 76.54, parties may submit surveys conducted by a disinterested professional organization that is independent from the cable systems or television stations ordering the surveys. The surveys must include the results of two weekly periods separated by at least 30 days, and one of the weeks must be outside the summer viewing period (i.e., AprilSeptember). The Commission recognized that the results of sample surveys can only be determinative within a given probability. Therefore, to assure that the survey errs on the side of excluding stations that are not actually significantly viewed, the Commission decided to require that the sample results exceed the significantly viewed standard, currently specified in Sec. 76.5(i) of the rules, by at least one standard error. (A ``standard error'' is a statistical measure used to assess, at a specified probability, that the sample estimate reflects the actual result had the entire universe been surveyed. Using one standard error, we can be approximately 70 percent certain that the actual audience statistic is the reported statistic plus or minus one standard error. The calculation of the standard error takes into account the sampling procedure, the sample size and the sample result.) Initially, the Commission required separate surveys for each cable community, but the rule was revised to allow a single survey where a cable system served multiple communities. Thus, if a cable system serves more than one community, a single survey may be taken, provided that the sample includes noncable television homes from each community that are proportional to the population.
19. Section 76.54(d) of our rules, 47 CFR 76.54(d), adopted in 1975, amended the rules to permit television stations that were not on the air at the time the ARB surveys were used to create the 1972 Appendix B list to demonstrate their significantly viewed status using countywide audience surveys in lieu of the more burdensome community bycommunity method. For such stations, significantly viewed status may be demonstrated on a countywide basis using independent professional audience surveys which cover three separate, consecutive fourweek periods and are otherwise comparable to the surveys used to compile the 1972 Appendix B list. Under this rule, a demonstration that a station is significantly viewed must be based on audience survey data from the station's first three years of operation. Where surveys are conducted pursuant to Sec. 76.54(d) of our rules, the Commission concluded that the potential for an unrepresentative sample was considerably lessened by the adoption of a longer survey period. Accordingly, the Commission decided not to require that the results be subject to the standard error requirement and the survey results must simply meet the significantly viewed standard for the station type specified in Sec. 76.5(i) of our rules.
20. The SHVERA requires the Commission to use the rules
``applicable to determining with respect to a cable system whether
signals are significantly viewed in a community'' as ``in effect on
April 15, 1976.'' It is clear from the SHVERA that Congress intends for
the Commission to use the same rules and process for making
significantly viewed determinations for satellite carriage as we have
used for such determinations in the cable carriage context. We thus
tentatively conclude to apply Sec. 76.54 of our rules to satellite
carriage. Consistent with Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, and
Section 119(c)(3) of title 17, 47 U.S.C. 119(c)(3), we propose to amend
Sec. 76.54 of our rules, 47 CFR 76.54, to include application to
satellite carriers. We do not believe that the SHVERA prevents us from
making the very amendments that are needed to implement the statutory
provisions. Our proposed Sec. 76.54 does not alter the procedures as
in effect on April 15, 1976, but is simply amended to make reference to
satellite carriers and the new SV List. We also propose to amend Sec.
76.54 to update the existing reference to ``Grade B contour,'' which
applies to analog stations, to add ``noise limited service contour,''
the service contour relevant for a station's digital signal. We note
that the Commission has previously decided that the digital signal of a
television broadcast station will be accorded the same significantly
viewed status as that of the analog signal, except that where the
station is broadcasting only a digital signal, the station must
petition for significantly viewed status using the analog requirements
in Sec. 76.54. We further propose to amend Sec. 76.54 to eliminate an
outdated reference and correct a typographical error, neither of which
changes in any way the substance or the process of the rule. In light
of the statutory restriction to use rules in effect on April 15, 1976, we seek comment on our proposed amendments to Sec. 76.54.
Additionally, we propose to require satellite carriers or broadcast
stations seeking satellite carriage to follow the same petition process
now in place for cable operators, as required by Sec. Sec. 76.5, 76.7
and 76.54 of our rules. We believe, however, that it is not necessary
to amend Sec. Sec. 76.5 and 76.7 in order to permit the filing of such
petitions for significantly viewed status by satellite carriers or
broadcast stations seeking satellite carriage. A station or cable
operator that wishes to have a station/community designated significantly viewed would file a petition pursuant to
[[Page 11319]]
the pleading requirements in Sec. 76.7(a)(1) and use the method
described in Sec. 76.54 to demonstrate that the station is
significantly viewed as defined in Sec. 76.5(i). We seek comment on our proposal and tentative conclusion.
4. Definition of ``Network Station''
21. As mentioned above, our rules define network station as one of
the ``three major national networks.'' This definition is expressly
relied upon in the standard for determining whether a station is
significantly viewed for placement on the SV List. The SHVERA, however,
relies on the definition of ``network station'' that is used in the
copyright provisions of title 17, which provides that a ``network station'' is:
``(A) a television broadcast station, including any translator
station or terrestrial satellite station that rebroadcasts all or
substantially all of the programming broadcast by a network station,
that is owned or operated by, or affiliated with, one or more of the television networks in the United States which offer an
interconnected program service on a regular basis for 15 or more
hours per week to at least 25 of its affiliated television licensees
in 10 or more States; or (B) a ``noncommercial educational broadcast
station (as defined in section 397 of the Communications Act of 1934
[47 U.S.C. 397])'' (47 U.S.C. 340(i)(2); 47 U.S.C. 339(d)(3) and 17
U.S.C. 119(d)(2); 17 U.S.C. 119(d)(2); 47 U.S.C. 340(i)(2); 47
U.S.C. 339(d)(5 47 CFR 76.66(a)(5); Section 339(d)(5) of the Act; 47 U.S.C. 339(d)(5)).
22. The Commission's rules define three types of commercial stations for which significantly viewed status may be recognized: Full, partial, and independent. The SHVERA, however, relies on the copyright definitions of ``network'' and ``superstation.''
23. Our significantly viewed rules for satellite carriers must
follow SHVERA's requirement that we retain the standard we have used
since April 15, 1976, which prevents us from updating these rule
provisions for this purpose. Therefore, we propose to harmonize the
apparent inconsistencies by continuing to use the definition of network
and independent station in our rules for purposes of determining
whether a station is significantly viewed for placement on the SV List,
which thereby excludes noncommercial stations from eligibility for the
SV List. However, as also required by the SHVERA, we will use the
copyright definition of network station and superstation for purposes
of subscriber eligibility and the other applications of the
significantly viewed provisions. We seek comment on these tentative conclusions.
5. Limitations on Carriage of Significantly Viewed Stations Based on Network Nonduplication and Syndicated Exclusivity
24. Section 340(a)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(a)(1), limits
satellite carriage of stations included on the SV List ``to the extent
such signal is prevented from being carried by a cable system in such
community under the Commission's network nonduplication and syndicated
exclusivity rules.'' In the cable context, a commercial television
station may assert ``network nonduplication rights'' to prevent a cable
system within the geographic zone specified in the Commission's rules
from carrying programming that duplicates the network programming for
which the station has exclusive rights based upon its affiliate
agreement with the network. Similarly, a television station or
distributor may prevent a cable system within the geographic zone
specified in the Commission's rules from carrying programming broadcast
by any other television station if the exclusive rights to that
programming are held by the station or distributor. Assertion of these
rights, collectively known as the ``cable exclusivity'' rules,
generally results in the blacking out of the programming in question.
The cable system may continue to carry the station's signal, provided
the duplicating programming is blacked out, or it may decide to cease
carriage of the station's signal entirely. However, the rules further
provide that a station whose programming is subjected to an assertion
of either of the exclusivity rules is exempt if it is ``significantly
viewed'' in the relevant cable community. The significantly viewed
exception to the Commission's exclusivity rules is based on an otherwise distant station establishing that it receives a
``significant'' level of overtheair viewership in a subject
community. If this viewership level is met, the station is no longer
considered distant for purposes of the application of the Commission's
exclusivity rules because it has established that it can be received
overtheair in the subject communities. Thus, a cable system is not
required to black out the duplicating programming of a significantly viewed station.
25. Notwithstanding the significantly viewed exemption to the cable
exclusivity rules, the station or distributor asserting exclusivity
protection may petition the Commission to waive the significantly
viewed exception to permit a reassertion of exclusivity protection
against a station claiming ``significantly viewed'' status. If the
station or distributor asserting exclusivity demonstrates that the
station claiming the significantly viewed exemption no longer merits
significantly viewed status, the waiver is granted, and the duplicating
programming must be blacked out. Thus, as described above, the
Commission's SV List includes all stations deemed to be significantly
viewed but indicates by a pound sign (
26. The satellite context is somewhat more complicated. The
exclusivity rules do not apply to satellite carriage of network stations but only to carriage of ``national distributed
superstations,'' as provided by Section 339(b)(1)(A), 47 U.S.C.
339(b)(1)(A), which was enacted by the SHVIA in 1999. Section 340(e) of
the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340(e), maintains the status quo by providing that
the exclusivity rules shall not apply to distant network stations.
Section 340(e)(1), however, allows the Commission to adopt rules to
permit assertion of the exclusivity rules by stations and distributors
with respect to stations carried by satellite carriers pursuant to the
new significantly viewed provisions. This provision requires us,
therefore, to (1) create a limited right for a station or distributor
to assert exclusivity with respect to a station carried by a satellite
carrier as significantly viewed; (2) allow that significantly viewed
station to assert the significantly viewed exception, just as a station
would with respect to cable carriage; and (3) allow the station or
distributor asserting exclusivity to petition us for a waiver from the
exception. Thus, Congress directs the Commission to ensure parity
between cable operators and satellite carriers so that a station's
programming that is subject to blackout deletions with respect to a
cable system serving a cable community would also be subject to
deletions for a satellite carrier's subscribers within the same cable community or within a satellite community.
27. We will implement these SHVERA requirements first by denoting
on the SV List which stations in which communities have been subjected
to deletions such that duplicating programming must be blacked out by
cable operators. Satellite carriers using the SV List may carry these
stations but are subject to the same programming deletions that apply
to cable systems. Second, we will amend our rules so that stations and
distributors may assert exclusivity rights with respect to satellite
carriage of significantly viewed stations but only insofar as they can prove that the conditions supporting a
[[Page 11320]]
waiver of the significantly viewed exception from the exclusivity rules
would apply. We seek comment on this approach to effectuate Congressional provisions and intent.
6. Definition of ``Satellite Community'
28. The SHVERA requires the Commission to define ``community'' in the satellite context. Under the SHVERA, a ``community'' is either (1) a county or a cable community under the Commission's rules (applicable to significantly viewed signals), or (2) a satellite community as defined by the Commission in implementing the statute; see 47 U.S.C. 340(i)(3). The concept of a ``community'' is important in the SHVERA because the term describes the geographic area where subscribers will be permitted to receive significantly viewed signals.
29. Because the Commission's rules have previously only applied to cable carriage of significantly viewed signals, significantly viewed determinations currently are limited to cable communities. In the cable context, the Commission defined a community unit in terms of a ``distinct community or municipal entity'' where a cable system operates or will operate. Due to the localized nature of cable systems, cable communities were easily defined by the geographic boundaries of a given cable system, which are often, but not always, coincident with a municipal boundary and may vary as determined on a casebycase basis.
30. The concept of a cable community is largely inapplicable to the satellite context. Unlike cable service which reaches subscribers via local franchises across the country, satellite carriers offer service on a national basis, with no connection to a particular local community or municipality. Moreover, satellite service is offered in areas of the country that do not have cable service, and thus are not cable communities. Nevertheless, based upon the statutory language that the satellite carriers should use the existing list, we believe that, where a cable community is already defined, the statute requires a satellite carrier to use that defined ``community.'' We seek comment on this interpretation. We also seek comment on whether satellite carriers will be able to determine which of their subscribers are in existing communities and, if not, how best to apply existing cable communities to the satellite context.
31. In the context of adding future ``communities'' to the SV List, we seek to establish a definition of ``satellite community'' that will be appropriate for the nature of satellite service, including the opportunity to offer significantly viewed signals in a community where no cable system exists. The definition of satellite community will apply where a satellite carrier seeks to define a community not currently served by cable. We are proposing two alternative approaches and seek comment on these alternatives as well as invite comment on other possible definitions. One option would permit a carrier to seek significantly viewed status for a given station with respect to one or more specified fivedigit zip code areas. (We propose to use the five digit zip codes, as determined by the U.S. Postal Service.) For example, a satellite carrier or station could petition the Commission for a significantly viewed designation pursuant to Sec. 76.54 by listing one or more zip codes and demonstrating that the signal is significantly viewed in these zip codes collectively. If zip codes are aggregated to define a single community, we propose to require satellite carriers to demonstrate significantly viewed status by taking a survey that includes a sample of noncable television homes from each zip code included in the ``community'' which is proportional to the population. This proportional sampling is consistent with the existing cable rules that require the use of proportional surveys where more than one community is involved. We believe that zip code based communities can be appropriate for this purpose because they capture all areas of the country, including areas now unserved by cable, and provide a practical and efficient approach for satellite carriers to utilize the significantly viewed carriage option offered in the SHVERA. We note that the Commission has previously used zip codes in the satellite context; e.g., to define the various zones of protection afforded under the satellite exclusivity rules. We further propose that a satellite community defined by one or more such zip codes is subject to any subsequent changes made to the listed zip codes by the U.S. Postal Service. Ideally, we would forecast for an area without cable what the franchise area would be were a cable operator to establish cable service. However, in areas currently unserved by cable, this forecasting may not be feasible. In this regard, if a cable operator subsequently offers cable service in a community after it has been defined as a ``satellite community,'' we seek comment on whether we should continue to use the zip codedefined satellite community or, instead, redefine the community to the extent it overlaps with the franchise area of the new cable community.
32. We recognize that the first proposal, use of one or more zip
codes to define a satellite community, may ignore an existing town,
village, municipality or other geopolitical entity that constitutes a
``community'' in the more traditional sense. Using one or more zip
codes could create an artificial ``community'' with no minimum or
maximum size, except as bounded by a postal zip code map. The
alternative proposal would define a satellite ``community'' as a
separate and distinct community or municipal entity (including
unincorporated communities within unincorporated areas and including
single, discrete unincorporated areas). The boundaries of the
incorporated areas would be the existing geopolitical boundaries, while
the unincorporated community would be defined by one or more fivedigit
zip code areas. We think that this approach may make it more likely
that a cable system subsequently built in such an area would serve a
``community'' similar to the satellite community, thus making the SV
List more easily used by both cable and satellite providers. We seek
comment on both alternatives and invite additional variations on these or other proposals.
7. Significantly Viewed Carriage Not Mandatory; Retransmission Consent Rights Not Affected
33. The SHVERA does not require satellite carriers to carry
significantly viewed stations. The SHVERA also does not change the
retransmission consent requirements. Cable operators must obtain
retransmission consent to carry significantly viewed signals, and the
SHVERA requires the same of satellite carriers. The SHVERA provides,
however, that retransmission consent is not necessary if the satellite
carrier is exempt from having to obtain retransmission consent for
other reasons. For example, a satellite carrier is exempt under Section 325(b) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 325(b), from having to obtain
retransmission consent when providing a distant signal of a network to
an unserved subscriber who cannot receive an overtheair signal from
an affiliate of the same network. Thus, under the SHVERA, the satellite
carrier would still be exempt from having to negotiate retransmission
consent when providing a significantly viewed signal if it was providing it as a distant signal to an unserved household.
34. We note that the SHVERA requires that local stations must be
carried on a single dish; see 47 U.S.C. 338(g)(1). Does this
requirement with respect to local stations apply to outofmarket significantly viewed signals? If so, does
[[Page 11321]]
the statute necessarily require that out of market significantly viewed
signals be carried such that the subscriber would receive them on the
same antenna and equipment as the local signals? We seek comment on these questions.
8. Definition of ``Satellite Carrier''
35. The SHVERA defines the term ``satellite carrier'' in new
Section 338(k) of the Act by reference to the definition in the
copyright title 17. This definition includes entities providing
services as described in 17 U.S.C. 119(d)(6) using the facilities of a
satellite or satellite service licensed under part 25 of the
Commission's rules to operate in Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) or
FixedSatellite Service (FSS) frequencies. As a general practice, not
mandated by any regulation, DBS licensees usually own and operate their
own satellite facilities as well as package the programming they offer
to their subscribers. In contrast, satellite carriers using FSS
facilities often lease capacity from another entity that is licensed to
operate the satellite used to provide service to subscribers. These
entities package their own programming and may or may not be Commission
licensees themselves. In addition, a third situation may include an
entity using a nonU.S. licensed satellite to provide programming to
subscribers in the United States pursuant to a blanket earth station
license. We believe that the definition of ``satellite carrier'' would
include all three types of entities described above but we nevertheless seek comment on this issue.
B. Subscriber Eligibility To Receive ``Significantly Viewed'' Signals
36. In addition to the statutory requirements concerning station eligibility, the SHVERA also limits the subscribers who are eligible to receive the signals of significantly viewed stations. In general, subscribers are not eligible to receive outofmarket significantly viewed signals of a network station unless they are already receiving the local signal of an affiliate of the same network via satellite. Application of this general principle differs, however, depending on whether the significantly viewed signal is analog or digital, with additional restrictions imposed on digital signals. The subscriber eligibility limitations also provide for an exception where there is no local network station present in the relevant market or when a local network station waives the subscriber eligibility requirements. But first, we will consider the definition of ``subscriber.''
1. Definition of ``Subscriber''
37. The SHVERA defines the term ``subscriber'' in new Section
338(k) by reference to the definition in 17 U.S.C. 122(j)(4), which
provides that a subscriber is ``a person who receives a secondary
transmission service from a satellite carrier and pays a fee for the
service, directly or indirectly, to the satellite carrier or to a
distributor. Notably, the definition used by SHVERA differs slightly
from the definition of subscriber currently contained in 17 U.S.C. 119,
which establishes the significantly viewed compulsory copyright license
for satellite carriers. The definition in 17 U.S.C. 119 limits
``subscribers'' to individuals in private homes. We believe use of the
broader definition in 17 U.S.C. 122(j)(4) was intentional because
Congress sought to treat satellite subscribers to significantly viewed
stations in the same manner as satellite subscribers to localinto
local service. The 17 U.S.C. 119 definition applies to ``distant''
signals, to which significantly viewed signals represent an exception.
We believe the statute is clear on this point but seek comment on this
tentative conclusion. Subscriber in the more general sense, including a
cable subscriber, is defined in our rules and amended here to include subscribers to satellite service.
2. Analog Service Limitations; Receipt of Local Analog Service Required
38. The SHVERA requires that a subscriber ``receive retransmissions of a signal that originates as an analog signal of a local network station from that satellite carrier pursuant to section 338'' to be eligible to receive an outofmarket network station's significantly viewed analog signal. We believe this means that subscribers receiving ``localintolocal'' service from their satellite carrier are eligible to also receive significantly viewed signals, and that the fundamental intention is to assure that a subscriber is receiving the local affiliate of the same network as the significantly viewed station. We base this interpretation of Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, on the limitation of this eligibility requirement only to significantly viewed ``network'' stations, as well as language in the House Commerce Committee Report. However, the statutory copyright license in Section 119(a)(3) of title 17 provides that the limitation applies to both superstations and network stations. Thus, it appears that a satellite carrier must be offering localintolocal service and a subscriber must be receiving this service as a precondition to offering an outof market significantly viewed station's signal to that subscriber (subject to the exception described below). We seek comment on our tentative conclusion.
39. Because the statute specifically applies to the receipt of local service ``pursuant to Section 338,'' we believe that subscribers would not qualify for satellite retransmission of outofmarket significantly viewed signals if they are obtaining local stations via an overtheair TV antenna, including one that is integrated with a satellite dish. It is not clear what the result would be if a subscriber is receiving localintolocal service but the local affiliate of the network with which the significantly viewed station is affiliated is not carried by the satellite carrier. Such situation could arise if the local station failed to request carriage, refused to grant retransmission consent, or otherwise did not qualify for carriage pursuant to Section 338. We tentatively conclude that a subscriber receiving localintolocal service in a market is eligible for outof market significantly viewed stations even if the local stations retransmitted by the satellite carrier exclude an affiliate of the network with which a significantly viewed station is affiliated. We do not think that a subscriber should be deprived of access to a significantly viewed station because the local station refused to grant retransmission consent or is otherwise ineligible for local carriage, but we seek comment on this tentative conclusion.
40. Although Section 340 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 340, does not
specifically restrict application of this subscriber eligibility
requirement to markets in which satellite carriers are offering
``localintolocal'' service to subscribers, Section 119(a)(3)(B) of
title 17 limits application of the statutory copyright license to the
retransmission of significantly viewed stations to subscribers who
receive local service pursuant to Section 122 of title 17. Therefore,
we believe that the SHVERA, as a whole, contemplates that subscribers
in a market in which ``localintolocal'' service is not being offered
are not eligible for significantly viewed stations retransmitted by
such carriers, except in the situations described in Section III.B.4.,
infra, in which there is no affiliate of a given network in the market. We seek comment on our tentative conclusions.
3. Digital Service Limitations; Receipt of Local Digital Service
Required; Definitions of ``Equivalent Bandwidth'' and ``Entire Bandwidth'
41. Similarly, to be eligible to receive an outofmarket network station's
[[Page 11322]]
significantly viewed digital signal, a satellite subscriber must be
receiving a digital signal from a local affiliate of the station's same
network via satellite. We note that most of the issues raised in our
previous section about analog subscriber eligibility are also relevant
to our discussion here regarding the general digital subscriber
eligibility requirement. So as not to duplicate discussion of these
issues, we seek comment on these issues as they relate to digital
subscriber eligibility. Moreover, we tentatively conclude that these
issues should be treated similarly with respect to the digital
subscriber eligibility requirement. We seek comment on these issues and tentative conclusions.
42. In addition, the SHVERA specifies certain ``bandwidth'' requirements for the retransmission of the local network station's digital signal when a satellite carrier opts to retransmit the significantly viewed digital signal of an applicable affiliate station. Specifically, a satellite carrier's retransmission of a local network station's digital signal must either (1) occupy ``at least the equivalent bandwidth as the digital signal retransmitted'' or (2) comprise ``the entire bandwidth of the digital signal broadcast by such local network station.''
43. The SHVERA directs the Commission to define the terms ``equivalent bandwidth'' and ``entire bandwidth.'' In formulating definitions for these terms, the Commission is required to ensure that a satellite carrier is not: (1) Prevented from using compression technology; (2) required to use the exact bandwidth or bit rate as the local or distant broadcaster whose signal it is retransmitting; or (3) required to use the exact bandwidth or bit rate for a local broadcaster as it does for a distant broadcaster.
44. The concepts of ``equivalent bandwidth'' and ``entire bandwidth'' were created by Congress to prevent satellite carriage of a local network station's digital signal ``in a less robust format'' than the significantly viewed digital signal of an outofmarket network affiliate, such as by downconverting the local network station's digital signal from highdefinition (HD) digital format to standard definition (SD) digital format while retaining the HD digital format for the affiliate's significantly viewed signal. The SHVERA, however, recognizes that not all local network stations will be broadcasting in HD or multicast format. Therefore, the SHVERA permits satellite carriage of an outofmarket network affiliate's significantly viewed digital signal in HD or multicast format while only carrying the local network station's signal in a single SD format when the local network station is only broadcasting in that single SD format. For example, if the local network station is broadcasting in multicast format, and the significantly viewed network affiliate is broadcasting in HD format, the satellite carrier may carry the HD signal of the significantly viewed network affiliate under the ``equivalent bandwidth'' requirement, provided that it carries the local network station's multicast signals. (The House Commerce Committee Report states that Section 340(b)(2)(B)(i)'s reference to ``equivalent bandwidth'' seeks ``to ensure that the local affiliate's choice to multicast does not prevent the satellite carrier from retransmitting a significantly viewed signal of a distant affiliate of the network that chooses to broadcast in highdefinition.'') Another example is if the local network station is broadcasting in a single SD format, while the significantly viewed network affiliate is broadcasting in HD or multicast format. The ``entire bandwidth'' provision does not prevent carriage of the significantly viewed network affiliate in HD format. A satellite carrier may carry the HD or multicast signal of the significantly viewed network affiliate under the ``entire bandwidth'' requirement, provided that the satellite carrier carries the local network station's original SD format. (According to the House Commerce Committee Report, Section 340(b)(2)(B)(ii)'s reference to ``entire bandwidth'' was intended ``to ensure that a satellite carrier could still retransmit a significantly viewed distant digital signal of a network affiliate in a more robust format than a digital signal of a local broadcaster of the same network so long as the satellite carrier is carrying the digital signal of the local affiliate in its original format.'') We seek comment on these tentative conclusions.
45. We seek comment generally on the concepts of ``equivalent bandwidth'' and ``entire bandwidth.'' While we believe the final order adopted pursuant to this NPRM will define these concepts as required by the statute, we do not believe it is necessary at this time to include definitions of these terms in our rules because they will, to some extent, depend upon specific circumstances in each case. The rules we propose provide that satellite carriers must abide by the ``equivalent bandwidth'' and ``entire bandwidth'' requirements. We believe that the choice of format by a satellite carrier in delivering the signal of the significantly viewed network affiliate will determine the format required for the signal of the local network station in order to be permitted to retransmit the significantly viewed signal in the relevant local community. We believe this may afford satellite carriers some flexibility with respect to the broadcast of multicast streams. For example, if a satellite carrier chooses to retransmit only a portion of the multicast signal of the significantly viewed network affiliate, it need only retransmit the local network station using the same amount of bandwidth. We seek comment on these issues and tentative conclusions.
46. We also seek comment on whether satellite carriers must use the same compression techniques for both the local network station and the significantly viewed network affiliate. We note that doing so may result in differences in real bandwidth and bit rate, depending on the programming content carried by the signal. For example, a significantly viewed network affiliate broadcasting a sporting event would use more bandwidth than a local network station broadcasting an interview (i.e., talking head). In this example, should we apply the same compression standard to both stations, thereby precluding the significantly viewed sporting event? Instead, should only comparable content that uses a comparable bit rate be afforded equivalent bandwidth? Should we require only that the same amount of bandwidth be made available to the local network station, allowing the local station to choose the amount of bandwidth it needs? We seek comment on these issues. (The SHVERA provides that the ``equivalent bandwidth'' definition developed pursuant to new Section 340(h)(4), 47 U.S.C. 340(h)(4), will also apply to the provisions concerning ``distant digital signals'' of network stations in new Section 339(a)(2)(D)(iii)(II) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 339(a)(2)(D)(iii)(II), as amended by Section 204 of the SHVERA.)
47. We note that the SHVERA expressly provides that the significantly viewed provisions pertaining to equivalent or entire bandwidth do not mandate carriage in the context of Section 338's ``carryone, carryall'' provisions. To avoid any ambiguity in this regard, the SHVERA requires that the Commission's definitions of equivalent and entire bandwidth do not affect (1) the definitions of ``program related'' and ``primary video,'' or (2) a satellite carrier's carryone, carryall ob
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Evan Baranoff, Evan.Baranoff@fcc.gov, or Eloise
Gore, Eloise.Gore@fcc.gov, of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202)
4182120. For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction
Act information collection requirements contained in this document,
contact Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St,
SW., Room 1C823, Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to
Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.
Common CFR Searches
14 CFR Part 39 40 CFR Part 52 14 CFR Part 71 33 CFR Part 165 50 CFR Part 679 26 CFR Part 1 40 CFR Part 180 47 CFR Part 73 50 CFR Part 17 33 CFR Part 117 44 CFR Part 67 50 CFR Part 648 14 CFR Part 97 33 CFR Part 100 40 CFR Part 63 50 CFR Part 622 26 CFR Part 301 39 CFR Part 111 40 CFR Part 300 50 CFR Part 660 44 CFR Part 65 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 40 CFR Part 271 47 CFR Part 64 50 CFR Part 665 47 CFR Part 76 50 CFR Part 229 14 CFR Part 23 14 CFR Part 25 21 CFR Part 522