Browse: Departments   Dates   Agencies  

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Veterans Affairs Department

CFR Citation: 47 CFR Part 73

Docket ID: [MB Docket No. 87-268; FCC 08-72]

NOTICE: Part II

DOCUMENT ACTION: Final rule.

SUBJECT CATEGORY: Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service

DATES: Effective March 21, 2008.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY: This document disposes of the petitions for reconsideration filed in response to the Seventh Report and Order in this digital television (``DTV'') Table of Allotments proceeding and also addresses the comments filed in response to the Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding. This document finalizes the post transition DTV table and provides all eligible stations with a channel for digital operation after the transition from analog to digital television in February 2009. This document makes several changes to the DTV Table in response to petitions for reconsideration and comments and establishes in Appendix B the parameters for posttransition operation by television broadcasters.

SUMMARY: Federal Communications Commission,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

This is a summary of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Report and Order (``MO&OR'') in MB Docket No. 87 268, FCC 0872, adopted March 3, 2008, and released March 6, 2008. 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).

I. Introduction

1. On August 6, 2007, we adopted a new, and final, Table of Allotments for digital television (``DTV'') providing all eligible stations with channels for DTV operations after the DTV transition on February 17, 2009. Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Seventh R&O and Eighth FNPRM), Advanced Television Systems and their Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service, 22 FCC Rcd 15581 (2007) (Seventh R&O and Eighth FNPRM). The final DTV Table accommodates all eligible broadcasters, reflects to the extent possible the channel elections made by broadcasters, and is consistent with efficient spectrum use. The final DTV Table also establishes the channels and facilities necessary to complete the digital transition and ultimately will replace the existing DTV Table at the end of the DTV transition. The post transition DTV Table will be codified at 47 CFR 73.622(i). The revisions to the posttransition table made herein are attached hereto in Appendix A. The current DTV Table, which is contained in 47 CFR 73.622(b), will become obsolete at the end of all authorized pre transition DTV operations. The current NTSC Table, which is contained in 47 CFR 73.606(b), will become obsolete at the end of the transition, when all fullpower analog operations must cease. The existing DTV Table continues to govern stations' DTV operations until the end of the DTV transition. This MO&OR resolves all petitions for reconsideration and related issues in connection with the final DTV Table of Allotments.

2. We received 124 timely filed petitions for reconsideration of the Seventh R&O reflecting 221 requests for action on individual stations. The vast majority of the petitions request specific changes to the DTV Table and/or Appendix B facilities. The DTV Table specifies a channel for each eligible full power broadcast television station. Appendix B sets forth specific technical facilitiesERP, antenna HAAT, antenna radiation pattern, and geographic coordinatesat which stations will be allowed to operate. Appendix B also includes information on service area and population coverage. In the MO&OR, we address these specific requests as well as several more general issues raised by some petitioners. In general, we have accommodated the requests made by petitioners for changes to the DTV Table and/or Appendix B to the extent possible consistent with the interference and other standards outlined in the Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Seventh FNPRM), 71 FR 66592, November 15, 2006 and the Seventh R&O in this proceeding. A large number of the petitions requested changes to Appendix B facilities to permit the station to use an existing analog antenna when the station returns to its analog channel for posttransition digital operations. We addressed and resolved 30 such requests that were raised during the comment period for the Seventh R&O. Where possible, we have made the revisions requested by these petitioners. We note, too, that the flexibility we recently adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Review Report and Order will provide many of the petitioners with the opportunity to request and receive the facilities they sought in this docket when the station files its application for authorization on its final, posttransition channel. Reliance on the application process for modifying facilities is consistent with the requests and preferences of several petitioners, as described, infra. We also note that when stations filed their petitions for reconsideration, they were unaware of the flexibility we would provide in the application process, and many filed to preserve their rights, while advocating for revision through the application process rather than by reconsideration. We also reiterate that requests for revisions to Appendix B in this docket, or for modifications in the application process, that are attempts to maximize beyond authorized posttransition facilities will not be granted at this time. However, as provided in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, stations will have the opportunity to request
[[Page 15285]]
expanded facilities later this year. See Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, Section V.E., para. 148.

3. In addition, we are adopting an Eighth Report and Order (Eighth R&O) herein addressing a number of revisions to the DTV Table and/or Appendix B proposed in the Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Eighth FNPRM). In the Eighth FNPRM, we sought comment on tentative channel designations (``TCDs'') for three new permittees and identified a number of other proposed revisions to the DTV Table and/or Appendix B advanced by commenters in either reply comments or late filed comments to the Seventh FNPRM. In the Eighth R&O, we address comments received in response to the Eighth FNPRM.

Third DTV Periodic Review

4. On December 22, 2007, the Commission adopted a Report and Order in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding. See Report and Order, Third Periodic Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, MB Docket No. 0791, FCC 07228 (rel. Dec. 31, 2007) (``Third DTV Periodic Report and Order'') (73 FR 5634, Jan. 30, 2008). In the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, we adopted a number of procedures and rules changes designed to provide flexibility to broadcasters to ensure that they meet the statutory transition deadline and complete construction of their final, post transition facilities. Among other things, we established construction deadlines for fullpower television stations to construct their full, authorized posttransition (DTV Table Appendix B) facilities and decided that stations moving to a different channel for posttransition operation would not be required to construct or complete a digital facility on their pretransition DTV channel. Specifically, the Commission established the following construction deadlines: (1) May 18, 2008 for stations that will use their pretransition DTV channel for posttransition operations and already have a construction permit that matches their posttransition (DTV Table Appendix B) facilities; (2) August 18, 2008 for stations that will use their pretransition DTV channel for posttransition operations, but which do not have a construction permit that matches their posttransition (DTV Table Appendix B) facilities; and (3) February 17, 2009 for stations building digital facilities based on a new channel allotment in the post transition DTV Table and for stations facing a unique technical challenge, such as the need to reposition a sidemounted antenna, that prevents them from completing construction of their final DTV facilities before turning off their analog transmission. In addition, we announced our intent to lift the freeze on the filing of maximization applications on August 17, 2008, the date by which we expect to have completed processing stations' applications to build their posttransition facilities. Until this date, we will maintain our freeze and, except as discussed below, will not accept maximization applications to expand facilities.

5. We also adopted several policies in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order designed to accommodate stations that apply for facilities that deviate to some extent from the facilities set forth in the Appendix B adopted herein. For example, we adopted a waiver policy that will permit rapid approval of minor (i.e., not exceeding 5 miles) expansion applications filed by stations that are moving to a different channel (e.g., their analog channel) for posttransition operation. Id. Specifically, we will permit stations to expand beyond their authorized service area where the station demonstrates that such expansion: (1) Would allow the station to use its analog antenna or a new antenna to avoid a significant reduction in posttransition service from its analog service area; (2) would be no more than five miles larger in any direction than their authorized service area, as defined by the post transition DTV Table Appendix B; and (3) would not cause impermissible interference, i.e., more than 0.5 percent new interference, to other stations. We also stated that, while we generally will not permit more than 0.5 percent new interference, we will consider on a casebycase basis allowing stations to cause additional new interference if stations can demonstrate that they need this additional flexibility to serve their analog viewers. Consistent with our existing rules, we will also consider on a casebycase basis stations' negotiated interference agreements provided these agreements are consistent with the public interest. Id. This policy will allow added flexibility for stations that wish to use their existing analog channel antenna, and will help the transition process by reducing the demands on equipment suppliers and installation crews during a critical time as the transition deadline nears. As noted above, we received a number of petitions for reconsideration from stations seeking changes to the DTV Table and Appendix B to permit them to use their analog antenna when they return to their analog channel. The 5mile waiver policy we adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, in addition to the relief we grant herein, should provide significant relief to stations in this situation. In addition, with respect to evaluating interference in applications to construct posttransition facilities, we permitted stations a limit of 0.5 percent new interference in addition to that in the DTV Table Appendix B. This approach provides more flexibility than the interference standard proposed in the Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM, which would have permitted a total of 0.5 percent interference posttransition, rather than 0.5 percent interference in addition to existing interference reflected in DTV Table Appendix B. This added flexibility in the interference standard, together with the 5mile waiver policy, should permit quick action on and approval of the vast majority of applications for the final DTV facilities adopted in the DTV Table and Appendix B herein. In the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, we stated that stations should file their applications for post transition facilities as soon as possible in order to have the maximum time to order equipment and build their facilities. We provided expedited processing (generally within 10 days) to stations whose applications demonstrate the following requirements: (1) The application does not seek to expand the station's facilities beyond its final posttransition DTV Table Appendix B facilities; (2) the application specifies facilities that match or closely approximate the DTV Table Appendix B facilities (i.e., if the station is unable to build precisely the facilities specified in DTV Table Appendix B, then it must apply for facilities that are no more than five percent smaller than its facilities specified in Appendix B with respect to predicted population); and (3) the application is filed within 45 days of the effective date of the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, which became effective January 30, 2008. Stations that filed a petition for reconsideration of the Seventh R&O may receive expedited processing provided they file their applications within 45 days of the Commission's release of this Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration and otherwise qualify for expedited processing. II. Discussion

A. General Issues

6. Most of the petitions for reconsideration filed in response to the Seventh R&O pertain to individual
[[Page 15286]]
station situations. We will discuss these petitions in detail below, grouped according to the nature of the request. However, a number of petitioners raised general issues, and we begin by discussing these petitions.

1. MSTV Petition for Reconsideration and Clarification

7. We grant in part and deny in part the Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc. (``MSTV'') Petition for Reconsideration and Clarification, which, along with several ex parte letters, urges the Commission to afford regulatory flexibility to stations to permit them to build posttransition facilities that will serve current viewers. We agree with many of the points raised by MSTV and have taken a number of steps in this proceeding and in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding to address their concerns.

8. MSTV argued in both this docket and the Third DTV Periodic Review that the Commission should entertain and grant stations' requests as part of the applications process rather than through the allotment process based on petitions for reconsideration of the Seventh R&O. We agree and grant their petition to the extent that many of the requests made by specific broadcasters can be addressed at the application stage and do not require adjustments to Appendix B. However, we are taking a twopronged approach by both revising Appendix B in response to petitions for reconsideration, where appropriate, and providing significant flexibility in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding for applications for posttransition facilities. These two approaches together will permit stations to apply for posttransition facilities that match as closely as possible the facilities that the station has requested, is authorized to serve, and that reach current analog viewers without causing interference to other stations or violating the freeze.

9. MSTV is particularly concerned that the Commission provide flexibility to stations that are not currently on their final, post transition channels with respect to antenna patterns, particularly those stations that want to use their current analog antennas for post transition operation. MSTV argues that, as a technical matter, it can be difficult and in some cases impossible to build DTV facilities to operate on a new channel that will replicate the interim DTV antenna pattern, which is the pattern the Commission tried to replicate in the DTV Table Appendix B. In addition, MSTV states that many stations would like to use their analog antenna for their posttransition operations and this antenna may not be capable of replicating precisely the antenna pattern reflected in DTV Table Appendix B. MSTV also notes that, in light of these difficulties, many stations may have to reduce power significantly on the posttransition channel to shrink the station's service area in order to keep the service contour within the contour allotted on Appendix B. This could result in a loss of service posttransition to many current viewers. We shared MSTV's concern in this regard and therefore urged stations to file petitions for reconsideration, including stations that had not filed during the comment cycle following the Seventh FNPRM. These general concerns, as well as the specific circumstances portrayed in the individual petitions and comments, contributed to the Commission's decisions in the Third DTV Periodic Review Report and Order to provide procedures and policies affording greater flexibility in the application process.

10. MSTV notes that, in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding, broadcasters proposed a number of solutions to address these antenna pattern issues. Specifically, MSTV and the National Association of Broadcasters (``NAB'') proposed that the Commission permit stations returning to their analog channel for posttransition operations and planning to use their existing analog antenna to exceed the Appendix B service contour by no more than five miles. In addition, in its Petition for Reconsideration and Clarification in this proceeding, MSTV also proposed, as an alternative measure to address antenna pattern concerns, that the Commission apply a more relaxed interference standard to stations returning to their NTSC channel (i.e., permit such stations to cause a maximum of 2 percent interference for 12 months after February 2009) to afford these stations the ability to replicate their NTSC coverage. MSTV asserted that the Commission could resolve the antenna pattern issue by adopting these proposals in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding. However, MSTV also urges the Commission to grant individual stations' requests for relief if they have filed petitions for reconsideration of the Seventh R&O in this proceeding.

11. As noted above, in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order we adopted a waiver policy that will permit rapid approval of minor (i.e., not exceeding 5 miles) expansion applications filed by stations that are moving to a different channel (e.g., their analog channel) for posttransition operation. This 5mile waiver policy will allow added flexibility for stations that wish to use their existing analog antenna and, by permitting more such stations to use existing antennas, should reduce the demand for new equipment and installers for the remainder of the transition period. While we declined in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order to permit more than 0.5 percent new interference generally, we stated that we would consider on a casebycase basis allowing stations to cause additional new interference if stations can demonstrate that they need this additional flexibility to serve their analog viewers. We also stated that, consistent with our existing rules, we would consider on a casebycase basis stations' negotiated interference agreements provided these agreements are consistent with the public interest. We decline to adopt any further relief proposed by MSTV in this proceeding. As we stated in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, we believe that the 5mile waiver policy, together with other policies adopted in that Order, provide sufficient flexibility to stations, especially when combined with the changes to the DTV Table Appendix B we adopt herein for stations that filed petitions for reconsideration.

12. We received a total of 124 timely filed petitions reflecting 221 requests for changes to the DTV Table and/or Appendix B for individual stations. We grant, in whole or in part, 112 of these requests. For these stations, as discussed further below, we are changing Appendix B to either reflect the specific parameters requested by the station for posttransition operation or to otherwise provide the station with substantial relief. For stations for whom the revised Appendix B adopted herein has been changed to reflect the exact parameters sought by the station, these parameters either match a current authorization for the station or the station will presumably file an application for posttransition operation requesting these parameters that will be eligible for expedited processing pursuant to the procedures adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order. Thus, for these stations there should be no antenna pattern issue left to resolve. With respect to stations for whom the revised Appendix B herein provides some but not all of the relief sought by the station, the flexibility adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order will permit these stations to file an application for posttransition operation that deviates to some extent from these Appendix B parameters. The combination of the relief provided herein and the flexibility adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order [[Page 15287]]
should be sufficient to address antenna pattern concerns for the vast majority of stations moving to a new channel post transition.

13. We grant MSTV's request that, where stations did not seek reconsideration of discrepancies between Appendix B and the facilities that DTV stations are using or intend to use posttransition, (See Petition for Reconsideration and Clarification of MSTV at 89.), they will not be deemed to have given up any rights to fix these discrepancies at the application or licensing stage.

14. It is worthwhile to clarify that the specific parameters listed on DTV Table Appendix B describe each station's service area based on its certification during the channel election process. In many cases this is a hypothetical facility. See Seventh R&O, 22 FCC Rcd at 15588 89, paras. 1718. When a station applies for the construction permit to build its facility, it may need to depart to some extent from the parameters listed on Appendix B to construct the actual facility, for example, to reflect an achievable directional antenna pattern or to locate the antenna at a height on the tower where mounting is possible. Station applications that cover the same area (or not more than five percent smaller) will be processed quickly. For such stations, no change to Appendix B will be necessary. For stations that wish to make a more significant adjustment, for example, to use their existing analog antenna, we will consider their petition for reconsideration, as described herein, as well as their forthcoming application for construction permit (``CP''). Stations that did not file a petition for reconsideration, or filed too late to be considered, may nevertheless apply for the facilities they want and we will consider their application consistent with the procedures and policies adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Review Report and Order.

2. Protection of DTV Allotments

15. We deny the request of several petitioners to abandon Appendix B and rely exclusively on the DTV Table of Allotments, specifying only communities and channel numbers and not the specific parameters for digital facilities. Contrary to these petitioners' arguments, use of Appendix B is consistent with the Commission's longstanding practice for analog and digital channel allotments.

3. TV Channels 5 and 6

16. Mullaney Engineering, Inc. (``MEI'') and EME Communications (``EME'') have filed petitions requesting that the Commission eliminate the requirement in section 73.525 of the Commission's rules that new FM stations protect channel 6 DTV allotments or, alternatively, that it altogether eliminate channel 6, and possibly channel 5, from the digital TV allotment process and allocate that corresponding spectrum to the FM service. Section 73.525 requires that applications for construction permits for new or modified facilities for a non commercial educational (``NCE'') FM station on Channels 200220 (88.1 91.9 MHz) protect affected TV stations operating on channel 6 unless the application is accompanied by a written agreement between the NCE FM applicant and each affected TV Channel 6 broadcast station concurring with the proposed NCEFM facilities. See 47 CFR 73.525. Affected stations are defined as TV Channel 6 stations located within specified distances of an NCEFM station on FM channels 200220. We deny these requests.

B. Requests for Minor Adjustments

17. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, we grant five requests for minor adjustments to station coordinates for stations that are remaining on their pretransition digital channel. At this stage in the allotment process, we need make such changes only for stations whose pre and posttransition DTV channels are the same and that, therefore, generally need not file an application for construction or modification. Where the station's pre and post transition DTV channels are the same, the corrected coordinates are specified on a station license or construction permit, and the requested change did not result in a change of more than three seconds latitude or longitude for the station, we are making the requested correction. The stations for which we make such a correction are listed in Appendix D1 hereto and the changes requested by those stations are reflected in DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein. We deny the requests for similar changes from nine stations that are moving to a different channel for posttransition operations and that may request such minor coordinate changes as part of the station's application for post transition facilities. The stations for which we decline to make minor adjustments herein but which may request these adjustments in an application are: KDSE, Dickinson, ND; KFME, Fargo, ND; KUPK, Garden City, KS; WBKO, Bowling Green, KY; WEAU, Eau Claire, WI; WIBW, Topeka, KS; WJHG, Panama City, FL; WSAW, Wausau, WI; and KBSH, Hays, KS. Such minor changes will not prevent applications that otherwise qualify from receiving expedited processing.

18. Some of the stations listed on Appendix D1 requested modification of Appendix B to round a station's geographic coordinates to the nearest whole second rather than merely truncate the data. For such petitioners whose pre and posttransition channels are the same, and that provided us with station coordinates expressed to the tenth of a second, we have revised DTV Table Appendix B herein to round the coordinates to the nearest whole second.

19. In addition, for five stations we deny the request to change station coordinates because the geographic coordinates as listed in Appendix B match the coordinates listed on the station's license or construction permit. The five stations are KSEE, Fresno, CA; WTAP, Parkersburg, WV; WTVY, Dothan, AL; KKTV, Colorado Springs, CO; WOWT, Omaha, NE. We are revising parameters in Appendix B to match a current license or CP, but any desired adjustment to a license or CP itself must be requested by application. For each of these five stations, the pre and posttransition DTV channels are the same. Thus, these stations already have an authorization on their posttransition channel and should revise the coordinates on their license or CP by requesting such revisions on FCC Form 302.

C. Requests To Make Changes to Certification

20. We grant 55 petitions consistent with our treatment in the Seventh R&O to permit changes to stations' facility certifications (FCC Form 381) based on appropriate demonstrations from these stations where such changes are consistent with the circumstances contemplated in the Seventh Further Notice. In paragraph 28 of the Seventh Further Notice, the Commission recognized that some stations have already constructed or received authorization to construct facilities on the station's TCD that provide service to areas that extend beyond that to which the station certified on FCC Form 381. Because the interference protection provided during the channel election process was limited to the facilities to which the station certified in FCC Form 381, the Commission noted that stations serving or authorized to serve areas beyond their certified area could become subject to interference in those areas. The Commission stated that it would permit stations in this situation to propose to modify their certified facilities to match their authorized or constructed facilities. Stations requesting such a change were required
[[Page 15288]]
either to (1) submit an engineering analysis demonstrating that the proposed change to their certified facilities would not result in interference in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's existing TCD or (2) submit the signed, written consent of every affected licensee. The Commission also stated in the Seventh Further Notice that stations in these circumstances seeking a change in their certification would be required to accept interference from any channel election already approved.

1. Requests That Meet the Interference Criteria

21. We grant 53 petitions, as we did in the Seventh R&O, to permit stations to change their facility certifications (FCC Form 381), and thus our posttransition DTV Table Appendix B, where such stations have demonstrated in a petition for reconsideration that such modification of their facilities will conform to licensed or authorized facilities and where the proposed change to the Appendix B facilities either meets the interference criterion discussed above (i.e., the proposed change would not result in interference in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's existing TCD) or, as discussed further below, the station affected agreed to accept the interference. We have made the changes requested by these petitioners and the changes are reflected in the revised DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein. A list of the stations for which we made these changes is attached hereto in Appendix D2. To address the requests of those commenters in this group whose stations are moving to a different channel for posttransition service, we recalculated their posttransition DTV coverage area based on their authorized or licensed DTV facility, as indicated by the file number shown in Appendix D2. Only one of these stations requires special explanation, KPXC, due to its atypical circumstances.

22. KPXC, Denver, CO. As noted on Appendix D2, we grant the request from Paxson Denver License, Inc. (``Paxson''), licensee of station KPXCTV, channel 59, and permittee of KPXCDT, channel 43, Denver, CO, which was allotted channel 43 in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Paxson requests that the KPXC certification and Appendix B allotment be made consistent with its DTV construction permit originally granted on November 29, 2005. While our interference analysis shows that the change requested by KPXC would cause 2.2 percent interference to KOAA, Pueblo, CO (analog channel 5, digital channel 42 for both pre and posttransition), KOAA has submitted a letter stating that it consents to the allotment change requested by KPXC.

23. As we noted in the Seventh R&O, KPXC has encountered zoning issues that have been the subject of litigation. As Paxson is still lacking zoning approval for its preferred site for KPXC, it has informed the Commission that it will be filing an application to move to a new site. According to Paxson, the combination of the changes to Appendix B for KPXC granted herein and the flexibility adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order will permit it to file an application to specify a new tower site for KPXC. We continue to request that Paxson keep us informed concerning any relevant progress and events in its zoning case.
2. Requests by Operating Stations That Do Not Meet Interference Criteria

24. We grant requests from two stations, consistent with our treatment in the Seventh R&O, to permit stations that are already operating their final, posttransition DTV facilities to change their facility certifications (FCC Form 381), and thus our posttransition DTV Table Appendix B, to reflect those facilities, even though such operations will exceed the 0.1 percent interference standard. As described below, these stations requested changes to the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to reflect operating facilities where we have determined that the interference caused to the TCD of another licensee exceeds the 0.1 percent interference standard and there is no interference agreement with the affected station. While these stations are requesting changes to the parameters adopted in the Seventh R&O in situations where the level of interference exceeds the relevant standard, we find that they have met their burden of demonstrating that special circumstances justify a waiver because they are already operating their final, posttransition DTV facilities. We believe it is unnecessary and unfair to require these alreadyoperational facilities to reduce service. In addition, the stations receiving the interference have not filed an opposition to the stations requesting the change.

25. WBNX, Akron, OH. We grant the request of Winston Broadcasting Network, Inc. (``Winston''), licensee of station WBNXTV, channel 55, and WBNXDT, channel 30, Akron, OH, which was allotted channel 30 in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Winston requests that the parameters for WBNX in Appendix B be changed to conform the antenna ID number to the information reflected in the WBNXDT license. The Commission's interference analysis shows that WBNXDT's licensed facility causes 0.16 percent interference to WEYI, Saginaw, MI (analog channel 25, digital channel 30 for both pre and posttransition).

26. KALB, Alexandria, LA. We grant the request of Media General Communications Holdings, LLC (``Media General''), licensee of station KALB, channel 5, and KALBDT, channel 35, Alexandria, LA, which was allotted channel 35 in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Media General requests that the certification and Appendix B parameters for KALB be changed. The changes requested would make those parameters consistent with the KALBDT license. The Commission's interference analysis shows that KALBDT's licensed facility causes 0.59 percent interference to KARD, West Monroe, LA (analog channel 14, digital channel 36 for both pre and posttransition).

D. Requests for Modified Coverage Area

27. We grant the requests filed on behalf of 40 stations whose posttransition DTV channel is different from their pretransition DTV channel to change the coverage area in the Seventh R&O DTV Table Appendix B. The stations for which we are modifying the coverage area herein are listed in Appendix D3 and the modified parameters for those stations are reflected in Appendix B as modified herein. In general, these petitioners argue that the facilities specified in the DTV Table Appendix B adopted in the Seventh R&O do not permit the station to provide service to the area served by the station's analog facility. We deny the requests filed on behalf of 24 stations for which our adjustment would result in a smaller facility than that described by the parameters on Appendix B as adopted in the Seventh R&O or that would shift the station's service area in such a way that existing viewers would lose service posttransition. In addition, we deny the requests filed by 13 stations for which our adjustment to Appendix B would result in impermissible interference. Both groups of petitionersthose granted or deniedcan apply for desired facilities in the application process.

28. Many of these petitioners plan to return to their station's analog channel posttransition and request changes to the parameters specified on Appendix B to permit the station to use its existing analog antenna. In general, these petitioners argue that it is difficult or impossible for the station to use their preferred antenna to serve the allotment specified on Appendix B. In many
[[Page 15289]]
cases, in order to stay within this allotment, as required by the existing freeze on expansion of a station's contour, the station would be required to significantly reduce power, thereby potentially resulting in a loss of service posttransition to existing viewers. Other petitioners request changes to the power level or antenna specified in Appendix B in order to allow the station to continue to serve its analog viewers posttransition.

29. In response to the petitions filed on behalf of these stations, we have provided the same relief herein that we provided to similarly situated stations in the Seventh R&O. Specifically, we have recalculated Appendix B facilities based on replicating the analog coverage that was used to determine the station's initial DTV table facilities. If the recalculation would result in a reduction in the Appendix B facilities or would result in an undesirable shift in the station's service area, we are retaining the Appendix B facilities that we adopted in the Seventh R&O without change. The stations whose Appendix B facilities are not being changed for this reason are: KABY, Aberdeen, SD; KAII, Wailuku, HI; KARE, Minneapolis, MN; KAZT, Prescott, AZ; KETA, Oklahoma City, OK; KFPH, Flagstaff, AZ; KHAW, Hilo, HI; KHET, Honolulu, HI; KMEB, Wailuku, HI; KPNX, Mesa, AZ; KSFY, Sioux Falls, SD; KUSA, Denver, CO; KUVI, Bakersfield, CA; KWEX, San Antonio, TX; WBIR, Knoxville, TN; WEEK, Peoria, IL; WIRT, Hibbing, MN; WMAE, Booneville, MS; WMAZ, Macon, GA; WMMP, Charleston, SC; WNAC, Providence, RI; WOTF, Melbourne, FL; WTVX, Fort Pierce, FL; and WZZM, Grand Rapids, MI. Although we are not revising Appendix B in these latter cases, we note that these stations may be able to obtain much, if not all, of the relief they seek when they file an application for their final post transition DTV channel pursuant to the rules and procedures adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order. As discussed above, we adopted a number of policies in that Order designed to give substantial flexibility to stations moving to a different channel for post transition digital service, including stations that are returning to their analog channel and that plan to use their analog antenna.

30. If our recalculation of Appendix B based on replication of the station's initial DTV table facilities would result in a larger coverage area or a desirable coverage area shift, and our analysis indicates that the recalculated facilities (1) meet the 0.1 percent interference standard specified in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order or (2) would cause more than 0.1 percent new interference but the affected station(s) agree to accept the interference, we are granting the request to change DTV Appendix B to reflect the larger or shifted coverage area. These stations are listed in Appendix D3, and the revised parameters for these stations are reflected in the revised DTV Table Appendix B, infra. We believe that permitting these changes to Appendix B is consistent with our overall goal in the DTV transition of encouraging replication of analog service. One of the Commission's objectives throughout the transition has been to permit broadcasters to reach with digital service the audiences they have been serving with analog service so that viewers will continue to have access to the stations that they are accustomed to receiving over the air. We remain committed to ensuring that viewers maintain the best possible television service after the transition date. The revisions granted to the stations listed in Appendix D3 are consistent with this goal as they will permit these stations to provide digital service to more of their established analog viewers.

1. Granted Requests for Which an Opposition Was Filed

31. For three stations listed on Appendix D3, WUSA, Washington, DC, WHAS, Louisville, KY, and WPBN, Traverse City, MI, there was an opposition filed to the station's petition for reconsideration. We briefly discuss these oppositions and related pleadings below. As described above, for all stations listed on Appendix D3, including WUSA, WHAS, and WPBN, our recalculation of Appendix B herein resulted in a larger coverage area consistent with our interference standards. Accordingly, we revised Appendix B for these stations to provide them with this larger coverage area. While these revisions to Appendix B may not include the specific parameters requested by WUSA, WHAS, and WPBN in their petitions, the revised Appendix B parameters together with the flexibility adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order should provide to these stations some, if not all, the relief they seek when they file applications for posttransition facilities.

32. WUSA, Washington, DC. We grant, in part, the request of Gannett Co. Inc. (``Gannett''), indirect owner of WUSA, channel 9, and WUSADT, channel 34, Washington, DC, allotted channel 9 in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Gannett submitted a petition for reconsideration requesting to amend the Form 381 certification of WUSADT to specify the station's replicated service area rather than the maximized service area in order to permit the station to use an existing combined analog antenna for its posttransition DTV operations. Sonshine Family Television, Inc. (``Sonshine'') filed an opposition to the petition claiming that the proposed revised allotment for WUSA would cause interference to WBPHDT, Bethlehem, PA (analog channel 60, post transition digital channel 9) in excess of the applicable interference standard. Sonshine argued initially that the proposed revised WUSA allotment would cause new interference to WBPH of 3.744 percent. In response to a later pleading filed by Gannett, Sonshine revised its position to support the WUSA proposal if certain power limitations were met by the posttransition WUSA facilities. The Commission recalculated Appendix B facilities for WUSA pursuant to the process described above and performed an interference analysis based on these recalculated Appendix B facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows no new interference from the revised Appendix B facilities for WUSA to WBPH or any other station and the revised WUSA parameters are reflected in the Appendix B adopted herein. While these revised parameters may not reflect all of the changes requested by Gannett, the changes to Appendix B when combined with the flexibility provided in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order for the application process should provide all or much of the relief sought for WUSA.

33. WHAS, Louisville, KY. We grant, in part, the request of Belo Corp. (``Belo''), licensee of WHAS, channel 11, and WHASDT, channel 55, Louisville, KY, allotted channel 11 in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Belo submitted a petition for reconsideration requesting that its Form 381 certification be amended to specify the WHAS replicated analog service area rather than its maximized service area and that Appendix B be modified to reflect an omnidirectional antenna pattern that would permit WHAS to use its existing analog omnidirectional antenna for posttransition operations. Primeland Television, Inc. filed an opposition arguing that the proposed changes to WHAS are premature and will cause substantial interference to the posttransition operations of WLFI, Lafayette, LA (analog channel 18, posttransition digital channel 11). Primeland also states that WLFI has declined to enter into an interference agreement with WHAS. Belo acknowledges in its [[Page 15290]]
petition that its proposed changes to WHAS would cause interference to WLFIDT, but argues that its proposal actually represents a reduction from the level of interference currently caused to WLFITV by WHASTV's analog facility. In its opposition, Primeland argues that the facilities specified in the DTV Table concern posttransition operations and that any masking interference caused by WHAS's analog facilities should be disregarded. In reply Belo argues that grant of its petition would best serve the public interest as the changes it requests for WHAS will permit existing analog viewers of that station to receive WHAS digital service, while those changes will not deprive any current analog viewers of WLFI of that station's digital service. The Commission recalculated Appendix B facilities for WHAS pursuant to the process described above and performed an interference analysis based on these recalculated Appendix B facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows no new interference from the revised Appendix B facilities for WHAS to WLFI or any other station and those revised WHAS parameters are reflected in the Appendix B adopted herein. While these revised parameters may not reflect all of the changes requested by Belo, the changes to Appendix B when combined with the flexibility provided in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order should provide all or most of the relief sought for WHAS.

34. WPBN, Traverse City, MI. We grant, in part, the petition for reconsideration filed on behalf of WPBN. Barrington Traverse City License LLC, licensee of television station WPBN, channel 7, and WPBN DT, channel 50, Traverse City, MI, was allotted channel 7 for post transition operations in the Seventh R&O. In its petition for reconsideration, Barrington seeks revised technical parameters for WPBN's posttransition operations in order to operate at the coordinates and height of its channel 7 analog operation, using its analog antenna.

35. WOOD License Company, LLC, licensee of WOODTV/DT in Grand Rapids, Michigan, opposes Barrington's petition on the grounds that granting the requested change for WPBN would cause interference to WOOD's posttransition operations on DTV channel 7, resulting in loss of service to 11,868 persons or 0.52 percent of WOOD's service population. In its reply, Barrington argues that WOOD is incorrect and that the requested allotment for WPBN would actually cause substantially less interference to WOODDT posttransition than is caused currently by the WPBN analog facility.

36. The Commission recalculated Appendix B facilities for WPBN pursuant to the process described above and performed an interference analysis based on these recalculated Appendix B facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows no new interference from the revised Appendix B facilities for WPBN to WOOD or any other station and those revised WPBN parameters are reflected in the Appendix B adopted herein. While these revised parameters may not reflect all of the changes requested by Barrington, the changes to Appendix B when combined with the flexibility provided in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order should permit Barrington to obtain at least some of the relief it seeks for WPBN.
2. Granted Requests Filed by Stations That Were Previously Addressed in the Seventh Report and Order

37. Petitions for reconsideration were filed on behalf of the following stations requesting reconsideration of the Commission's decisions in the Seventh R&O regarding the stations. The Commission has modified Appendix B herein for these stations and the stations appear on Appendix D3 herein. As these petitions relate to particular decisions made in the Seventh R&O, they are discussed individually below.

38. KCET, Los Angeles, CA. We grant, in part, the petition for reconsideration of Community Television of Southern California (``CTSC''), licensee of NCE station KCET, channel 28, and KCETDT, channel 59, Los Angeles, CA, which received channel 28 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. In its comments filed in response to the Seventh Further Notice, CTSC requested that the Commission change DTV Table Appendix B to specify maximized parameters for KCETDT. The Commission denied the CTSC request because the KCET maximized facilities would cause interference to the certified facilities of KEYT, Santa Barbara, CA (analog channel 3, posttransition digital channel 27) on its TCD in excess of the permissible 0.1 percent limit. In its petition for reconsideration, CTSC states that it has determined that Appendix B specifies a different antenna than the current KCET analog antenna, which CTSC states is the antenna it has always intended to use for its posttransition facility. CTSC requests that the Commission modify Appendix B to specify its current antenna, which will permit replication of KCET's current NTSC and DTV service areas.

39. The Commission has recalculated the Appendix B facilities for KCET pursuant to the process described above and performed an interference analysis based on these recalculated Appendix B facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows no new interference to other stations from the revised Appendix B facilities for KCET and, accordingly, we have revised Appendix B herein to reflect these revised KCET parameters. While these revised parameters may not reflect all of the changes requested by CTSC, the changes we make herein to Appendix B when combined with the flexibility provided in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order should provide all or most of the relief sought for KCET.

40. WGAL, Lancaster, PA. We grant, in part, the petition for reconsideration of HearstArgyle Television, Inc. (``Hearst''), parent company of the licensees of WGAL channel 8 and WGALDT channel 58, which was allotted channel 8 for posttransition operations in the Seventh R&O. Hearst seeks reconsideration of the Commission's denial of its request to change the certified technical parameters for its post transition facilities to replicate analog service. Specifically, it reiterates its comments filed in response to the Seventh Further Notice where it requested an increase in HAAT to 415 meters and a decrease in ERP to 5.36kW. In response to these comments, the Commission recalculated WGAL's Appendix B facilities based on replicating its analog coverage area and determined that the recalculation resulted in a reduction in the Appendix B facilities for WGAL. Accordingly, in the Seventh R&O, we retained the larger Appendix B facilities that we had initially proposed for WGAL. Hearst argues in its petition that the Commission erred in its treatment of WGAL in the Seventh R&O because, in fact, the recalculated Appendix B facilities based on replication would result in a larger coverage area for WGAL.

41. As Hearst indicates in its petition that it would prefer a modified coverage area for WGAL even if that coverage area is smaller or shifted from the area on Appendix B, the Commission has recalculated the Appendix B facilities for WGAL pursuant to the process described above and performed an interference analysis based on these recalculated Appendix B facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows no new interference to other stations from the revised Appendix B facilities for WGAL and, accordingly, we have revised Appendix B herein to reflect these revised parameters.
[[Page 15291]]

3. Requests That Do Not Meet the Interference Standard

42. As described in greater detail below, we deny the requests from 13 stations that filed petitions requesting changes to the DTV Table Appendix B adopted in the Seventh R&O to increase the station's coverage area, because our recalculations of the Appendix B facilities and interference analysis show that the requested change would result in interference that would exceed the 0.1 percent interference standard and the affected station has not agreed to accept this interference. None of these petitions request changes to reflect DTV facilities they are operating or are authorized to operate. We note, however, that many of these stations must file an application for authority to construct the station's posttransition facility. As a result of the flexibility adopted in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, stations whose requests for modified coverage area are denied may be able to specify facilities in that application that more closely approach the parameters requested in the station's petition for reconsideration. The following is a list of these stations and a description of their individual circumstances.

43. KEMV, Mountain View, AR. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by Arkansas Educational Television Commission (``AETC''), licensee of noncommercial educational station KEMV, channel 6, and KEMVDT, channel 13, Mountain View, AR, which was allotted channel 13 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. AETC requests that the parameters for KEMVDT in Appendix B be adjusted to include an omnidirectional antenna with an ERP of 6.9 kW. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that KEMV would cause 0.6 percent interference to KTHV, Little Rock, AR (analog channel 11, digital channel 12 for both pre and posttransition), 2.1 percent interference KETG, Arkadelphia, AR (analog channel 9, digital channel 13 for both pre and posttransition), and 0.6 percent interference to WHBQ, Memphis, TN (analog channel 13, pretransition digital channel 53, posttransition digital channel 13).

44. WBBM, Chicago, IL. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by CBS Corporation (``CBS''), the ultimate owner of station WBBM, channel 2, and WBBMDT, channel 3, Chicago, IL. CBS filed a petition for reconsideration of the Seventh R&O requesting that the parameters for WBBMDT in Appendix B be adjusted to reflect operation with a directional antenna and an increase in ERP to 13.6 kW to nearly match the carriedover, maximized service contour of WBBM's channel 3 authorized operations. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WBBM would cause 0.4 percent interference to WINM, Angola, IN (analog channel 63, digital channel 12 for both pre and posttransition).

45. KTVU, Oakland, CA. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by KTVU Partnership (``Cox''), licensee of KTVU, channel 2, and KTVUDT, channel 56, Oakland, CA. KTVU was allotted channel 44 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Cox requests a change in certified facilities and a revision of KTVUDT's allotment in Appendix B to reflect operation with a directional antenna, a decrease in ERP to 500 kW, and an increase in HAAT to 513 meters. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that KTVU would cause 0.6 percent interference to KCSM, San Mateo, CA (analog channel 60, digital channel 43 for both pre and posttransition) and 0.4 percent interference to KBCW, San Francisco, CA (analog channel 44, digital channel 45 for both pre and posttransition).

46. WTOV, Steubenville, OH. We deny the petition for reconsideration of WTOV, Inc. (``Cox''), licensee of WTOV, channel 9, and WTOVDT, channel 57, Steubenville, Ohio. WTOV was allotted channel 9 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Cox requests a change in certified facilities and a revision of WTOV DT's allotment in Appendix B to reflect operation with a nondirectional antenna, an increase in ERP to 12 kW, and an increase in HAAT to 282 meters. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WTOV would cause 2.9 percent interference to WWCP, Johnstown, PA (analog channel 8, pretransition digital channel 29, and posttransition digital channel 8) and 0.6 percent interference to WVFX, Clarksburg, West Virginia (analog channel 46, digital channel 10 for both pre and posttransition).

47. WKRG, Mobile, AL. We deny the petition for reconsideration of Media General Communications Holdings, LLC (``Media General''), licensee of WKRG, channel 5, and WKRGDT, channel 27, Mobile, AL. WKRG was allotted channel 27 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Media General requests a change in the certification for WKRG and a revision of the station's allotment in Appendix B to reflect operation with a new antenna ID. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WKRG would cause 1.0 percent interference to WAIQ, Montgomery, AL (analog channel 26, digital channel 27 for both pre and post transition).

48. WRBL, Columbus, GA. We deny the petition for reconsideration Media General Communications Holdings, LLC (``Media General''), licensee of WRBL, channel 3, and WRBLDT, channel 15, Columbus, GA. WRBL was allotted channel 15 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Media General requests a change in the certification for WRBL and a revision of the station's allotment in Appendix B to reflect operation with an increased HAAT of 543 meters. The Commission's interference analysis based upon the recalculated Appendix B facilities for WRBL shows that WRBL would cause 0.2 percent interference to WGXA, Macon, GA (analog channel 24, digital channel 16 for both pre and posttransition).

49. WKMG, Orlando, FL. We deny the petition for reconsideration of PostNewsweek Stations, Orlando, Inc. (``PostNewsweek''), licensee of WKMG, channel 6, and WKMGDT, channel 58, Orlando, FL. WKMG was allotted channel 26 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. PostNewsweek requests that its post transition DTV allotment parameters be modified to reflect use of a polarized dielectric antenna with an ERP of 866 kW. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WKMG would cause 0.9 percent interference to WVEA, Venice, FL (analog channel 62, digital channel 25 for both pre and posttransition) and 0.2 percent interference to WRDQ, Orlando, FL (analog channel 27, pre transition digital channel 14, posttransition digital channel 27).

50. WAFB, Baton Rouge, LA. We deny the petition for reconsideration of Raycom Media, Inc. (``Raycom''), licensee of WAFB, channel 9, and WAFBDT, channel 46, Baton Rouge, LA. WAFB was allotted channel 9 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Raycom requests that Appendix B be revised to reflect use of WAFB's existing analog omnidirectional antenna. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WAFB would cause 1.0 percent interference to WVUE, New Orleans, LA (analog channel 8, pretransition digital channel 29, posttransition digital channel 8) and 12.9
[[Page 15292]]
percent interference to KLFY, Lafayette, LA (analog channel 10, pre transition digital channel 56, posttransition digital channel 10).

51. WITV, Charleston, SC. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by South Carolina Educational Television Commission (``SCETV''), licensee of WITV, channel 7, and WITVDT, channel 49, Charleston, SC. WITV was allotted channel 7 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. SCETV requests an increase in ERP to 20 kW to aid the station in replicating its analog coverage. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WITV would cause 0.2 percent interference to WOLO, Columbia, SC (analog channel 25, digital channel 8 for both pre and post transition).

52. WFUT, Newark, NJ. We deny the petition for reconsideration of Univision New York LLC (``Univision''), licensee of WFUT, channel 68, and WFUTDT, channel 53, Newark, NJ, which was allotted channel 30 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. Univision requests an increase in ERP and a change to the WFUT antenna radiation pattern to aid the station in replicating the WFUTDT coverage area. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WFUT would cause 0.2 percent interference to WFME, West Milford, NJ (analog channel 66, digital channel 29 for both pre and posttransition).

53. WDEF, Chattanooga, TN. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by WDEFTV, Inc. (``WDEF''), licensee of WDEF, channel 12, and WDEFDT, channel 47, Chattanooga, TN. WDEF was allotted channel 12 for posttransition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. WDEF requests use of its existing nondirectional antenna with a decrease in ERP to 13 kW. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WDEF would cause 0.5 percent interference to WRCB, Chattanooga, TN (analog channel 3, digital channel 13 for both pre and posttransition).

54. WWBT, Richmond, VA. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed by WWBT, Inc. (``WWBT''), licensee of WWBT, channel 12, and WWBT DT, channel 54, Richmond, VA. WWBT was allotted channel 12 for post transition operations in the DTV Table in the Seventh R&O. WWBT requests an increase in ERP to 12.1 kW. Although WWBT could cause up to 2 percent interference because it is a station with a pretransition digital allotment out of core that is moving to its analog channel, the Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WWBT would cause 3.0 percent interference to WVEC, Chattanooga, TN (analog channel 13, pretransition digital channel 41, posttransition digital channel 13).

55. KAAL, Austin, MN. We deny the petition for reconsideration of Hubbard Broadcasting Inc. (``Hubbard''), licensee of station KAALTV, channel 6, and KAALDT, channel 33, Austin, MN. KAAL was allotted channel 36 for posttransition operations in the Seventh R&O. In its petition for reconsideration, Hubbard requests that it be permitted to operate posttransition using the existing channel 36 facilities of station KTTCDT, Rochester, MN (analog channel 10, pretransition digital channel 36, posttransition digital channel 10). We find that KTTC's facilities are roughly 30 miles from KAAL's current tower and that KTTC is licensed to a different community (Rochester, MN instead of Austin, MN). Both findings indicate that it would be difficult for KAAL to properly serve Austin. In addition, the Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities that KAAL would cause 0.40 percent interference to KWSD, Sioux Falls, SD (analog channel 36, pretransition digital channel 51, and post transition digital channel 36).

E. Requests for Alternative Channel Assignments

56. We received 13 requests for an alternative channel assignment. We grant herein eight of these requests and deny five requests, consistent with our treatment of such channel change requests in the Seventh R&O. A list of the stations for which we are granting a change appears in Appendix D4, infra, and we have revised the DTV Table for these stations accordingly. For each of these stations, we believe that the circumstances described by the station are consistent with one or more of the criteria for consideration of alternative channel assignments outlined in the Seventh Further Notice. Each of these requested channel changes granted herein and listed on Appendix D4 meets the 0.1 percent interference standard.

57. The Commission stated that any request for an alternative channel assignment must either meet the 0.1 percent additional interference standard or be accompanied by a request for a waiver of the 0.1 percent limit or the signed written consent of the affected licensee. The Commission stated that it would grant waivers of the 0.1 percent limit where doing so would promote overall spectrum efficiency and ensure the best possible service to the public, including service to local communities.

58. We deny the channel change requests of five stations. As discussed further below, for three of these stations the Commission's interference analysis shows that the new channel requested by the station would cause interference to one or more other stations in excess of the 0.1 percent standard, and there is no agreement with the affected station(s) accepting this interference. In one case where the interference standard is exceeded, that of KCWX, Fredericksburg, TX, the petition for reconsideration was opposed. As discussed below, we decline to waive our interference limit for these stations. In addition, we decline to grant the channel change request of two stations that filed their requests too late for consideration in this Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration. Following is a brief discussion of these stations and the relevant circumstances.

59. WCOV, Montgomery, AL. We deny the petition for reconsideration filed on behalf of WCOV. Woods Communications Corporation (``Woods''), licensee of station WCOV, channel 20, and WCOVDT, channel 16, Montgomery, AL, elected and was allotted channel 16 for posttransition operations in the Seventh R&O. In its petition for reconsideration, Woods requests the substitution of channel 20 for its final, post transition digital channel in the Table of Allotments. The Commission's interference analysis shows that the proposed operation of WCOV on channel 20 would cause 0.40 percent interference to WIIQ, Demopolis, AL (analog channel 41, digital channel 19 for both pre and post transition), 0.17 percent interference to WTBS, Atlanta, GA (analog channel 17, digital channel 20 for both pre and posttransition), 0.45 percent interference to WMPV, Mobile, AL (analog channel 21, digital channel 20 for both pre and posttransition), 0.31 percent
interference to WYLE, Flor

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For additional information on this proceeding, contact Kim Matthews of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 4182154.