FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012 Page: 4,626
ix, 3728-4696 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
B. Basic Qualifications for Channel Sharing
1. Class A Television, Low Power Television, and TV Translators
19. As proposed in the Notice and mandated in the Spectrum Act, we will permit only full power
and Class A television stations to participate in channel sharing.62 The reverse-auction provisions of
Section 6403 of the Spectrum Act apply to "broadcast television licensees," which the statute defines as
"the licensee of (A) a full-power television station; or (B) ... a Class A television licensee;" 63 only such
licensees are eligible to participate in the reverse auction. Only these licensees enjoy primary interference
status protection, and must therefore be protected when we devise our repacking plans pursuant to Section
6403.64 Providing these primary licensees with the option of voluntarily relinquishing spectrum usage
rights while continuing to broadcast via a channel sharing arrangement is consistent with the Spectrum
Act and can facilitate the band clearing and relocation process.65
20. Some commenters support also allowing low power television stations and TV translators to
participate in channel sharing.66 Because the Spectrum Act limits participation in the reverse auction
required by section 6403(a)(1) to only full power and Class A stations, low power stations would not be
eligible to propose sharing a channel in conjunction with the incentive auction.67 Further, because we
license low power television stations and TV translators on a secondary interference basis, they create no
impediment to repacking as we need not protect these facilities in our repacking plan.68 For that reason,
relinquishment of spectrum by these licensees through channel sharing arrangements will not aid the band
clearing or relocation process-our immediate goal in this proceeding. Therefore, at this time we will not
62 A number of commenters agree with this conclusion. See Venture Comments at 2; MMTC Comments at 16;
Brown Comments at 3; ZGS Comments at 7-8. We acknowledge Venture's comments that "Class A operators who
are paired with full-service broadcasters in shared arrangements would have to be allowed to have ERP greater than
those currently allowed in the FCC rules." Venture Comments at 2. We agree that sharing the requisite single
transmission facility may require that channel-sharing Class A stations operate at a greater power. Class A stations
giving up their channel and sharing a channel with a full power television station would gain from this arrangement
as their operating power and service area would be greater than that allowed by the Class A rules. Conversely, full
power stations giving up their channel and sharing a Class A station's channel would have to agree to operate with
less power and a smaller service area. In addition, Class A stations operating analog facilities who agree to share a
full power station's digital channel would have to upgrade their station to digital operations. A Class A station with
an analog facility that agreed to share its channel with a full power station would also have to convert to digital in
order to accommodate the channel sharing arrangement. These are important issues that will be considered in a later
proceeding.
63 Spectrum Act at 6001(6), 6403(a).
S"Repacking" refers to the implementation of the U/V spectrum repurposing effort mandated by the Spectrum Act.
See Spectrum Act at 6403(b).
65 See id. at 6403(a)(2)(C) (identifying voluntary relinquishment of spectrum usage rights to share a TV channel
with another licensee as an eligible relinquishment for purposes of the reverse auction required by Section
6403(a)(l)).
66 Venture Comments at 2; MMTC Comments at 16; Brown Comments at 3; Smartcomm Comments at 4-5; ZGS
Comments at 7-8; Entravision Comments at 6.
67 See Spectrum Act at 6403(a)(1).
68 See AT&T Reply Comments at 9-10 (". .. there is no basis for LPTV licensees to assume any extensive rights to
continued operations. LPTV stations have always been authorized on a secondary, non-interference basis. LPTV
operations, as has always been the case, do not have any protection rights nor any assurance that their operations
would be protected from any reallocation process initiated by the Commission concerning the TV spectrum").
Section 6403(b)(5) of the Spectrum Act provides that "Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to alter the
spectrum usage rights of low-power television stations."4626
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 12-45
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012, book, April 2012; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc102307/m1/915/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.