New DTV Table of Allotments Out for Review
On October 20th, the Commission issued its Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (“NPRM”) requesting comment on the proposed new DTV Table of Allotments, which has been assembled as a result of the DTV channel election process. This table will ultimately replace the existing table at the end of the DTV transition as the definitive Table of Allotments.
First and foremost, the NPRM requests that licensees double-check their allotments to make sure that they are accurate, and that the Table reflects any conflict-resolving amendments that may have been made. Licensees are asked to comment on any inaccuracies or discrepancies.
Second, a limited group of licensees may request an alternative channel assignment. Specifically: (1) Licensees unable to construct full, authorized DTV facilities on their designated DTV channel, (2) licensees with irresolvable international coordination problems, (3) licensees with low-VHF channel designations, and (4) new licensees and permittees that attained such status after the start of the election process and that were assigned a new channel, may request an alternative Channel assignment in response to this NPRM, if they wish. This means that licensees that want to change their DTV allotments, but which are not in one of these four categories (that is to say, the station is technically able to construct its full, authorized DTV facility on its existing tentative channel assignment) may not request a channel change now, but rather must wait until the Table is finalized, and then may seek a channel change through the normal rule making procedures.
Third, the filing freeze continues to be in effect, and it sounds like it will remain in place until the final table is adopted. This means that modifications to full power stations that would exceed the contour previously approved for the station and proposed channel changes by Class A stations will continue to be precluded for the near future.
Fourth, 41 stations failed to timely file a certification form telling the FCC what facilities they intended to build and for which they wanted protection (i.e. replication, maximization, etc.). These stations were automatically assigned replication facilities, but if they wish to change that election in order to seek protection for their maximized service areas, they can request such protection now, so long as they don’t cause any new harmful interference.
Fifth, the NPRM resolves the handful of problematic channel elections left after the conclusion of Round Three, including issues in New York, Hartford, Connecticut, and Northern California.
Sixth, the FCC will now accommodate the 50 or so new licensees and permittees that were granted since the election process started. Some of these licensees and permittees have simply been assigned their current channel as their new home, but in some cases that channel would not work for DTV purposes and the FCC has given them a "best available" channel. If they don’t like the channel the FCC has selected for them, these stations can propose an alternative channel to be used during the transition as well as post-transition.
Comments on the NPRM are due by January 11, 2007 and Replies are due by February 12, 2007, so check the Table carefully.