The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 7371 Old 05-10-2007, 03:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 14,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

#1). I wonder when we might see a new DTV table of allotments for post transistion, or if/when we might see a "final" tentative channel designation list ?

There is suppose to be one this year sometime but with the way the FCC has been running behind on this stuff, no one is sure and the FCC hasn't given a timetable. It may come out when the results of the 3rd DTV Review is announced. The 2nd DTV Review is when the full power rules came out.

Quote:


#2). Has a NPRM, or other detailed document been published yet for 3rd DTV review? I saw the info in the press releases from the 4/25 FCC meeting, but can't find any detailed text yet ... Maybe it's not there yet, or I missed it/not looking in the right place, or there isn't going to be one before an R&O(that would seem unusual) ?

The FCC is taking comments on the items listed at the meeting and they will be the basis of the R&O that will be issued when the 3rd DTV Review is released. Remember it took almost 18 months from the time the FCC announced the 2nd DTV Review and the issuance of the R&O from it. Let's hope the FCC doesn't take as long this time or the Feb 17, 2009 deadline will be here before the R&O is issued.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 7371 Old 05-10-2007, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Thanks for the replies ..

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxeng View Post

Let's hope the FCC doesn't take as long this time or the Feb 17, 2009 deadline will be here before the R&O is issued.

Especially since one of the issues to be addressed regards a new form to be submitted by Dec 2007 and all of the things listed in press release they are going to address in 3rd DTV review seem to be "appropriate" to address before shut off occurs ..

"Chop chop" FCC

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #63 of 7371 Old 05-18-2007, 01:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
afiggatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 4,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There is a huge dump of digital transition documents and decisions posted today on the FCC website under the May 18 headlines at http://www.fcc.gov/. This should start this thread up again.
afiggatt is offline  
post #64 of 7371 Old 05-19-2007, 12:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa (We'll be back)
Posts: 2,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by afiggatt View Post

There is a huge dump of digital transition documents and decisions posted today on the FCC website under the May 18 headlines at http://www.fcc.gov/. This should start this thread up again.

I read some of that stuff yesterday and summarized some of it in the Programming section, but (understandably) it takes a back seat to the "upfronts" and those long-awaited fall schedule announcements. Still, it's vitally important for the DT transition.

I read four things from the May 18 FCC postings.

First, they admit, they've granted a lot of extensions -- more than 180 of the "full-power" deadline (a.k.a. "use it or lose it"), and 140 of the construction deadline.

Second, they break down the reasons behind the extensions, many of which are understandable (i.e.: inadequate power supply, siting dispute with local authorities, major hurricane damage, the fact that a temporary "side-mount" antenna can't fully duplicate the coverage of that station's analog top-mount, etc.) But they also make it clear that there's no blank check, admonishing three stations and informing seven stations that they will be forever consigned to lower power than originally authorized.

Third, they're proposing to tighten the rules. Thirty-two stations claimed "financial hardship" as their reason for seeking an extension. The Commission wants to limit that excuse in future to licensees who can prove that they're bankrupt, under receivership, or have had negative cash flow for the past three years. They also want to eliminate lack of equipment as an excuse because, "At this point in the transition, we believe stations have had ample time to order the equipment required to provide digital service and do not believe it is necessary or appropriate to grant stations additional time to construct because of equipment delays, absent extraordinary circumstances."

Finally, they made it clear that analog WILL BE SHUT OFF on Februay 17, 2009. That date is set by an act of Congress, and the FCC cannot and will not change it.

Views are strictly my own unless otherwise noted.
"ItÂs looking more like Y2K than the Bay of Pigs." - FCC Commissioner Adelstein, 6-13-09, on the DTV switch
dline is offline  
post #65 of 7371 Old 05-19-2007, 01:30 PM
Senior Member
 
HIPAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NE Pa
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm confused about extensions. What difference does it make when DTV construction is completed so long as it happens before Feb 2009? Anyone not ready then should be ordered to relinquish their license.

--- CHAS

If it ain't broke, fix it till it is.
HIPAR is offline  
post #66 of 7371 Old 05-19-2007, 02:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 14,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by HIPAR View Post

I'm confused about extensions. What difference does it make when DTV construction is completed so long as it happens before Feb 2009? Anyone not ready then should be ordered to relinquish their license.

--- CHAS

Those stations not on the air digitally after 3am local Feb 17, 2009 WILL NOT HAVE A LICENSE to broadcast PERIOD.

This proceeding handled just waiver applications for the July 1, 2005/6 full power deadline and how to handle them pre-transition. The FCC has been on this replication of service kick from the beginning so if a station wanted to maintain the same post transition coverage, they had to build out pre-transition to at least their analog coverage (or 80% of their digital coverage) to maintain it post transition. That is what has driven every extension review. Those stations who can't replicate due to technical issues and plan on moving to either their analog or a third channel, it would be silly to spend the money to build something that doesn't meet the FCC's requirement, be penalized for it and then spend the money all over again to meet the FCC's requirement post transition.

Here is how the FCC broke out the extensions:

Stations Granted Additional Six-Month Use or Lose Waivers - If the stations do not build to these permits, they loose full coverage protection post transition.
Call Sign Licensee City ST
KATV-DT KATV, LLC Little Rock AR
KBEH-DT Bela TV, LLC Oxnard CA
KBFD-DT The Allen Broadcasting Corp. Honolulu HI
KBJR-DT KBJR License, Inc. Superior WI
KBSV-DT Bet-Nahrain, Inc. Ceres CA
KCEC-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC Denver CO
KCSG-DT Southwest Media, LLC Cedar City UT
KCSM-DT San Mateo Community College District San Mateo CA
KCWC-DT Central Wyoming College Lander WY
KDLH-DT
Malara Broadcast Group of Duluth
Licensee, LLC Duluth MN
KECI-DT BlueStone License Holdings, Inc. Missoula MT
KEPR-DT
Fisher Broadcasting - Washington TV,
LLC Pasco WA
KETC-DT
St. Louis Regional Educational and Public
Television Commission St. Louis MO
KEVN-DT KEVN, Inc. Debtor in Possession Rapid City SD
KFBB-DT MMM License II, LLC Great Falls MT
KFTR-DT Telefutura Los Angeles, LLC Ontario CA
KFXB-DT
Christian Television Network of Iowa,
LLC Dubuque IA
KFYR-DT
North Dakota Television License Sub,
LLC Bismarck ND
KGCW-DT Burlington Television Acquisition Corp. Burlington IA
KHNL-DT Raycom National, Inc. Honolulu HI
KHIZ-DT Sunbelt Television, Inc. Barstow CA
KIDY-DT Sage Broadcasting Corporation San Angelo TX
KIMA-DT Fisher Broadcasting, Inc. Yakima WA
KIMT-DT MG Broadcasting, LLC Mason City IA
KITV-DT Hearst-Argyle Stations, Inc. Honolulu HI
KJTV-DT Ramar Communications II, Ltd. Lubbock TX
KLEI-DT Aina'e Co., Ltd. Kailua-Kona HI
KLEW-DT
Fisher Broadcasting - Washington TV,
LLC Lewiston ID
KLUZ-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC Albuquerque NM
KMCT-DT Louisiana Christian Broadcasting, Inc. West Monroe LA
KMVT-DT Neuhoff Family Limited Partnership Twin Falls ID
KMYQ-DT Tribute Television Holdings, Inc. Seattle WA
KNBC-DT NBC Telemundo License Co. Los Angeles CA
KREN-DT Reno License, LLC Reno NV
KREX-DT Hoak Media of Colorado, LLC Grand Junction CO
KRWG-DT Regents of New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM
KSBI-DT Family Broadcasting Group, Inc. Oklahoma City OK
KSBY-DT KSBY Communications, Inc.
San Luis
Obispo CA
KSCE-DT Christian Television El Paso TX
KSMS-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC Monterey CA
KSNB-DT Colins Broadcasting Company Superior NE
KSPR-DT Piedmont Television Holdings, LLC Springfield MO
KSYS-DT Southern Oregon Public TV Medford OR
KTAL-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Texarkana TX
KTGF-DT Destiny Licenses, LLC Great Falls MT
KTLM-DT Sunbelt Multimedia Co.
Rio Grande
City TX
KTUZ-DT Oklahoma Land Company Shawnee OK
KTVE-DT
Piedmont Television of Monroe/Ed
Dorado License, LLC El Dorado AR
KTVA-DT Alaska Broadcasting Company, Inc. Anchorage AK
KULR-DT MMM License II, LLC Billings MT
KVCR-DT
San Bernardino Community College
District San Bernardino CA
KVCW-DT Channel 33, Inc. Las Vegas NV
KVMY-DT KUPN Licensee, LLC Las Vegas NV
KVOA-DT KVOA Communications, Inc. Tucson AZ
KVYE-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC El Centro CA
KWBF-DT River City Broadcasting, Inc. Little Rock AR
KWES-DT Midessa Television, LP Odessa TX
KWGN-DT KWGN, Inc. Denver CO
KWYB-DT MMM License, LLC Butte MT
KYTX-DT MMT License, LLC Nacogdoches TX
WAWD-DT Beach TV Properties, LLC
Fort Walton
Beach FL
WAZE-DT
South Central Communications
Corporation Madisonville KY
WDBD-DT Jackson Television, LLC Jackson MS
WCIA-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Champaign IL
WDCA-DT Fox Television Stations, Inc. Washington DC
WEUX-DT Grant Media, LLC Chippewa Falls WI
WFGX-DT WFGX Licensee, LLC
Fort Walton
Beach FL
WFXI-DT
Piedmont Television Eastern Carolina
License, LLC Morehead City NC
WGBC-DT Robert M. Ledbetter Enterprises, LLC Meridian MS
WGGN-DT Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. Sandusky OH
WGSA-DT Southern TV Corporation Baxley GA
WGXA-DT
Piedmont Television of Macon License,
LLC Macon GA
WIDP-DT Ebenezer Broadcasting Group, Inc. Guayama PR
WISE-DT WISE-TV License, LLC Fort Wayne IN
WKBN-DT
Piedmont Television of Youngstown
License, LLC Youngstown OH
WKTC-DT WBHQ Columbia, LLC Columbia SC
WLAE-DT Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Inc. New Orleans LA
WLAX-DT Grant Media, LLC LaCrosse WI
WLOV-DT Lingard Broadcasting Corporation West Point MS
WMPN-DT
Mississippi Authority for Educational
Television Jackson MS
WMGT-DT Morris Network, Inc. Macon GA
WMYA-DT Anderson (WFBC-TV) Licensee, Inc. Anderson SC
WNKY-DT MMK License, LLC Bowling Green KY
WNYW-DT Fox Television Stations, Inc. New York NY
WPTZ-DT Hearst-Argyle Stations, Inc. North Pole NY
WQLN-DT
Public Broadcasting of Northwest
Pennsylvania, Inc. Erie PA
WSFX-DT Southeastern Media Holdings, LLC Wilmington NC
WSST-DT Sunbelt South Tele-Communications. Ltd. Cordele GA
WSTR-DT WSTR Licensee, Inc. Cincinnati OH
WTVH-DT WTVH License, Inc. Syracuse NY
WTVW-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Evansville IN
WUTB-DT Fox Television Stations, Inc. Baltimore MD
WUTV-DT WUTV Licensee, LLC Buffalo NY
WVEN-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC Daytona Beach FL
WVFX-DT Davis Television Clarksburg, LLC Clarksburg
WV
WVOZ-DT International Broadcasting Corporation Ponce PR
WVSN-DT La Cadena Del Milagro, Inc. Humacao PR
WVTA-DT Vermont ETV, Inc. Windsor VT
WXXV-DT Morris Network of Mississippi, Inc. Gulfport MS

Stations Granted Use or Lose Waivers Until 30 Days After the Effective Date of the
Amendments to Section 73.624(d) Adopted in Report and Order in the Third DTV Periodic Review Proceeding - These stations only have 30 days after the effective date of the 3rd DTV Review the FCC stated last month to get built the permits these grant or loose post transition full coverage protection
Call Sign Licensee City ST
KAQY-DT Monroe Broadcasting, Inc. Columbia LA
KGNS-DT Sagamore Hill Broadcasting of Texas, LLC Laredo TX
KIXE-DT
Northern California Educational
Television Association Redding CA
KMLM-DT Prime Time Christian Broadcasting, Inc. Odessa TX
KNAZ-DT Multimedia Holdings Corporation Flagstaff AZ
KNWS-DT Johnson Broadcasting, Inc. Katy TX
KRPV-DT Prime Time Christian Broadcasting, Inc. Roswell NM
KTVH-DT Beartooth Communications Company Helena MT
KUNO-DT Concord License, LLC Ft. Bragg CA
KVAL-DT Fisher Broadcasting - Oregon TV, LLC Eugene OR
KYES-DT Fireweed Communications Corp. Anchorage AK
KYOU-DT Ottumwa Media Holdings, LLC Ottumwa IA
KZTV-DT
Eagle Creek Broadcasting of Corpus
Christi, LLC Corpus Christi TX
WBIQ-DT
Alabama Educational Television
Commission Birmingham AL
WCTE-DT Upper Cumberland Broadcast Council Cookeville TN
WGGB-DT WGGB Licensee, LLC Springfield MA
WGTU-DT MTC License, LLC Traverse City MI
WHAG-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Hagerstown MD
WHDT-DT Guenter Marksteiner Stuart FL
WHNS-DT Meredith Corporation Greenville SC
WHO-DT New York Times Management Services Des Moines IA
WHOI-DT
Barrington Broadcasting Peoria
Corporation Peoria IL
WJCL-DT Piedmont Television Holdings, LLC Savannah GA
WLFL-DT WLFL Licensee, LLC Raleigh NC
WMDN-DT WMDN, Inc. Meridian MS
WNCF-DT Channel 32 Montgomery, LLC Montgomery AL
WNET-DT Educational Broadcasting Corporation Newark NJ
WNOL-DT Tribune Television New Orleans, Inc. New Orleans LA
WOAY-DT Thomas Broadcasting Co. Oak Hill WV
WPIX-DT WPIX, Inc. New York NY
WPXN-DT
Paxson Communications License
Company, LLC New York NY
WSWP-DT
West Virginia Educational Broadcasting
Authority Grandview WV
WTGS-DT Bluenose Broadcasting of Savannah, LLC Hardeeville SC
WTOV-DT WTOV, Inc. Steubenville OH
WTTA-DT Tribute Broadcast Holdings, LLC St. Petersburg FL
WTVG-DT WTVG, Inc. Toledo OH
WTVZ-DT WTVZ Licensee, LLC Norfolk VA
WWTV-DT
Heritage Broadcasting Company of
Michigan Cadillac MI

Stations Granted Use or Lose Waivers Until February 17, 2009 - These stations have reasons beyond their control (such as 9/11 for WNBC, Katrina for the New Orleans stations and other specific causes on a station per station basis) to get full power replication built and the FCC is allowing them to build their post transition setups and have it ready to go on line by Feb 17, 2009
Call Sign Licensee City ST
KABC-DT ABC Holding Company, Inc. Los Angeles LA
KCRA-DT Hearst-Argyle Stations, Inc. Sacramento CA
KEYT-DT Smith Media License Holdings, LLC Santa Barbara CA
KFVE-DT KHNL/KFVE License Subsidiary, LLC Honolulu HI
KHAS-DT Hoak Media of Nebraska License, LLC Hastings NE
KIMO-DT Smith Media License Holdings, LLC Anchorage AK
KJRH-DT Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company Tulsa OK
KMTV-DT Emmis Television License, LLC Omaha NE
KNDO-DT KHQ, Incorporated Yakima WA
KNOP-DT Hoak Media of Nebraska License, LLC North Platte NE
KOCO-DT
Ohio/Oklahoma Hearst-Argyle Television,
Inc. Oklahoma OK
KOTV-DT Griffin Licensing, LLC Tulsa OK
KPBT-DT
Permian Basin Public
Telecommunications, Inc. Odessa TX
KPXO-DT Paxson Hawaii License, Inc. Kaneohe HI
KRTV-DT KRTV Communications, Inc. Great Falls MT
KTRK-DT KTRK Television, Inc. Houston TX
KTVM-DT BlueStone License Holdings, Inc. Butte MT
KWSU-DT Washington State University Pullman WA
KXLF-DT KXLF Communications, Inc. Butte MT
WAPT-DT WAPT Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. Jackson MS
WBKI-DT Louisville Communications, LLC Campbellsville KY
WBOY-DT West Virginia Media Holdings, LLC Clarksburg
WV
WCPO-DT Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company Cincinnati OH
WDRB-DT Independence Television Company Louisville KY
WDSU-DT
New Orleans Hearst-Argyle Television,
Inc. New Orleans LA
WEWS-DT Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company Cleveland OH
WFTE-DT Independence Television Company Salem IN
WFTS-DT Tampa Bay Television, Inc. Tampa Bay FL
WHBQ-DT Fox Television Stations, Inc. Memphis TN
WHRO-DT
Hampton Roads Educational
Telecommunications Association, Inc.
Hampton-
Norfolk VA
WITF-DT WITF, Inc. Harrisburg PA
WJAR-DT NBC Telemundo License Co. Providence RI
WJRT-DT Flint License Subsidiary Corp. Flint MI
WMAR-DT Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company Baltimore MD
WOLE-DT
Western Broadcasting Corp. of Puerto
Rico, Inc. Aguadilla PR
WPBF-DT WPBF-TV Company Tequesta FL
WSAZ-DT Emmis Television License, LLC Huntington
WV
WSBT-DT WSBT, Inc. South Bend IN
WSIL-DT WSIL-TV, Inc. Harrisburg IL
WSJV-DT WSJV Television, Inc. Elkhart IN
WTRF-DT West Virginia Media Holdings, LLC Wheeling
WV
WTJR-DT Christian Television Network, Inc. Quincy IL
WTTV-DT Tribune Broadcast Holdings, Inc. Bloomington IN
WVTM-DT NBC Telemundo License Co. Birmingham AL
WXYZ-DT Channel 7 of Detroit, Inc. Detroit MI

Stations Denied Use or Lose Waivers - These stations are up the creek without a paddle - Game over for these stations. They loose full power coverage post transition protection.
Call Sign Licensee City St
KAME-DT Ellis Communications, Inc. Reno NV
KBDI-DT Colorado Public Television
Denver-
Broomfield CO
KUAM-DT Pacific Telestations, Inc. Agana GU
WCOV-DT Woods Communications Corporation Montgomery AL
WDHS-DT W. Russell Withers, Jr. Iron Mountain MI
WDTV-DT
Withers Broadcasting Company of West
Virginia Weston
WV
WTXX-DT WTXX, Inc. Waterbury CT

Stations Granted Six-Month Checklist Waivers - These stations have six months to complete construction of the station, as outlined in the original FCC posting of stations and channels and they have to serve 100% of their analog audience in digital coverage
Call Sign Licensee City ST
WBNX-TV Winston Broadcasting Network, Inc. Akron OH
WEIU-DT Eastern Illinois University Charleston IL
WPCW-DT Viacom Stations Group of Pittsburgh, Inc. Jeannette PA
WSMH-DT WSMH Licensee, LLC Flint MI

Stations Granted Checklist Waivers Until 30 Days After the Effective Date of the
Amendments to Section 73.624(d) Adopted in Report and Order in the Third DTV Periodic Review Proceeding - These stations have 30 days from the effective date of the 3rd DTV Review to complete construction of the station, as outlined in the original FCC posting of stations and channels and they have to serve 100% of their analog audience in digital coverage
Call Sign Licensee City ST
KAJB-DT Calipatria Broadcasting Company, LLC Calipatria CA
KGTF-DT
Guam Educational Telecommunications
Corp. Agana GU
KVTV-DT Eagle Creek Broadcasting of Laredo, LLC Laredo TX
WEDH-DT Connecticut Public Broadcasting, Inc. Hartford CT
WPME-DT HMW, Inc. Lewiston ME
WRUA-DT Eastern Television Corporation Fajardo PR

Use or Lose Waivers Dismissed - for various reasons, many on financial hardship or other causes, these stations have case by case rulings to do certain things to comply. Remember that the stations pleading financial hardship had to provide financial records of the past three years to prove their case and provide what they planned on doing to make the transition. Some will go dark, but I suspect that number will be less than 20 nationwide. Several have already stated they will cease broadcasting all together on Feb 17, 2009. Just saying "we can't afford it" wasn't good enough for this waiver.
Call Sign Licensee City ST
KAEF-DT BlueStone License Holdings, Inc. Arcata CA
KAMC-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Lubbock TX
KAMR-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Amarillo TX
KARD-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Monroe LA
KATC-DT KATC Communications, Inc. Lafayette LA
KBTV-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Beaumont TX
KCAU-DT Citadel Communications Co., Ltd. Sioux City IA
KCIT-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Amarillo TX
KCNC-DT CBS Television Stations, Inc. Denver CO
KEET-DT Redwood Empire Public Television, Inc. Eureka CA
KFDX-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Witchita Falls KS
KFNB-DT Wyomedia Corporation Casper WY
KGWC-DT Mark III Media, Inc. Casper WY
KHMT-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Billings MT
KJTL-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Witchita Falls KS
KLBK-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Lubbock TX
KLDO-DT Entravision Holdings, LLC Laredo TX
KLST-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. San Angelo TX
KLTJ-DT
Community Television Educators of
Texas, Inc. Galveston TX
KLWY-DT Wyomedia Corporation Casper WY
KMCC-DT Cranston II, LLC Laughlin NV
KMID-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Midland TX
KMGH-DT McGraw-Hill Broadcasting Company, Inc. Denver CO
KNLC-DT New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc. St. Louis MO
KODE-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Joplin MO
KQTV-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. St. Joseph MO
KRBC-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Abilene TX
KRMA-DT
Rocky Mountain Public Broadcasting
Network, Inc. Denver CO
KRCB-DT Rural California Broadcasting Corporation Cotati CA
KSAN-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. San Angelo TX
KSBN-DT
Total Life Community Education
Foundation Springdale AR
KSMQ-DT Southern Minnesota Quality Broadcasting Austin MN
KSNF-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Joplin MO
KSVI-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Billings MT
KTAB-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Abilene TX
KTDO-DT ZGS El Paso Television, LP Las Cruces NM
KTRG-DT Ortiz Broadcasting Corporation Del Rio TX
KTTW-DT Independent Communications, Inc. Sioux Falls SD
KTVD-DT Multimedia Holdings Corporation Denver CO
KTWO-DT Silverton Broadcasting, LLC Casper WY
KUSA-DT Multimedia Holdings Corporation Denver CO
KVHP-DT National Communications, LLC Lake Charles LA
KVLY-DT
North Dakota Television License Sub,
LLC Fargo ND
KVOS-DT Ackerley Broadcasting Operations, LLC Bellingham WA
KVRR-DT Red River Broadcast Co., LLC Fargo ND
KVTN-DT Agape Church, Inc. Pine Bluff AR
KXGN-DT Glendive Broadcasting Corporation Glendive MT
WABC-DT American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. New York NY
WAOE-DT Four Seasons Peoria, LLC Peoria IL
WBKB-DT Thunder Bay Broadcasting Corporation Alpena MI
WCFN-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Springfield IL
WDHN-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Dothan AL
WDTI-DT Indianapolis Community Television, Inc. Indianapolis IN
WECN-DT Encuentro Christina Network Corp. Naranjito PR
WFFF-DT Smith Media Holdings, LLC Burlington VT
WFFT-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Fort Wayne IN
WFXB-DT GE Media, Inc. Myrtle Beach SC
WFXI-DT
Piedmont Television of Eastern Carolina
License, LLC Morehead City NC
WFXP-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Erie PA
WFXV-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Utica NY
WFXW-DT Mission Broadcasting, Inc. Terre Haute IN
WGGS-DT Carolina Christian Broadcasting, Inc. Greenville SC
WHTV-DT Spartan-TV, LLC Jackson MI
WHUT-DT Howard University Washington DC
WICU-DT
SJL of Pennsylvania License Subsidiary,
LLC Erie PA
WIPR-DT
Puerto Rico Public Broadcasting
Corporation San Juan PR
WJET-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Erie PA
WJZY-DT WJZY-TV, Inc. Belmont NC
WLFG-DT Living Faith Ministries, Inc. Grundy WV
WMYT-DT WMYT-TV, Inc. Rock Hill SC
WNBC-DT NBC Telemundo License Co. New York NY
WNJU-DT NBC Telemundo License Co. Linden NY
WNMU-DT
Board of Trustees of Northern Michigan
University Marquette MI
WNYE-DT
Department of Information Technology
and Telecommunications of the City of
New York New York NY
WORA-DT Telecinco, Inc. Mayaguez PR
WPAN-DT Franklin Media, Inc. Fort Walton Beach FL
WQRF-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Rockford IL
WRFB-DT RyF Broadcasting, Inc. Carolina PR
WRUA-DT Eastern Television Corporation Fajardo PR
WSJU-DT Aerco Broadcasting Corporation San Juan PR
WSTE-DT Siete Grande Television, Inc. Ponce PR
WTSF-DT Tri State Family Broadcasting, Inc. Ashland KY
WTIC-DT Tribune Television Company Hartford CT
WTVA-DT WTVA, Inc. Tupelo MS
WTVE-DT
Reading Broadcasting, Inc., Debtor-in-
Possession Reading PA
WTWO-DT Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. Terre Haute IN
WVEO-DT International Broadcasting Corporation Aguadilla PR
WVIZ-DT Ideastream Cleveland OH
WVPX-DT Paxson Akron License, Inc. Akron OH
WYDC-DT WYDC, Inc. Corning NY

Stations with Modification Applications - These stations either have pending applications or have been issued permits since the list was compiled and published
KAKW-DT, Killeen, Texas66
KATV-DT, Little Rock, Arkansas67
KBJR-DT, Superior, Wisconsin68
KBSV-DT, Ceres, California69
KCWC-DT, Lander, Wyoming70
KDLH-DT, Duluth, Minnesota71
KENS-DT, San Antonio, Texas72
KFBB-DT, Great Falls, Montana73
KFTR-DT, Ontario, California74
KFYR-DT, Bismarck, North Dakota75
KIMA-DT, Yakima, Washington76
KIMT-DT, Mason City, Iowa77
KLEI-DT, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii78
KLUZ-DT, Alburquerque, New Mexico79
KMCT-DT, West Monroe, Louisiana80
KLMN-DT, Odessa, Texas
KMYQ-DT, Seattle, Washington82
KNBC-DT, Los Angeles, California83
KSCE-DT, El Paso, Texas84
KTUZ-DT, Shawnee, Oklahoma85
KULR-DT, Billings, Montana86
KVCR-DT, San Bernardino, California87
KVCW-DT, Las Vegas, Nevada88
KVMY-DT, Las Vegas, Nevada89
KVOA-DT, Tuscon, Arizona90
WAZE-DT, Madisonville, Kentucky91
WDCA-DT, Washington, District of Columbia92
WMGT-DT, Macon, Georgia93
WMYA-DT, Anderson, South Carolina94
WTVH-DT, Syracuse, New York95
WUTV-DT, Buffalo, New York96
WPCW-DT, Jeannette, Pennsylvania97
WQLN-DT, Eric, Pennsylvania98
WSFX-DT, Wilmington, North Carolina99
WSTR-DT, Cincinnati, Ohio100
WUTB-DT, Baltimore, Maryland101
WVEN-DT, Daytona Beach, Florida102
WVOZ-DT, Ponce, Puerto Rico103
WVSN-DT, Humacao, Puerto Rico104
WVTA-DT, Windsor, Vermont105


Bottom line is the waiver line has ended. No more waivers. Built it or loose it. Some stations waited too long to do anything and they now have to live with whatever digital coverage they have (if any). If they want to increase power (or put on a station) pre or post transition, they now have to apply for it like anyone else as if they never had post transition coverage protection and there is no guaruntees they will get it back. The Grim Reaper made his appearance. Next stop, Feb 17, 2009.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #67 of 7371 Old 05-19-2007, 09:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxeng View Post

Those stations not on the air digitally after 3am local Feb 17, 2009 WILL NOT HAVE A LICENSE to broadcast PERIOD.

This proceeding handled just waiver applications for the July 1, 2005/6 full power deadline and how to handle them pre-transition. The FCC has been on this replication of service kick from the beginning so if a station wanted to maintain the same post transition coverage, they had to build out pre-transition to at least their analog coverage (or 80% of their digital coverage) to maintain it post transition. That is what has driven every extension review. Those stations who can't replicate due to technical issues and plan on moving to either their analog or a third channel, it would be silly to spend the money to build something that doesn't meet the FCC's requirement, be penalized for it and then spend the money all over again to meet the FCC's requirement post transition.

Bottom line is the waiver line has ended. No more waivers. Built it or loose it. Some stations waited too long to do anything and they now have to live with whatever digital coverage they have (if any). If they want to increase power (or put on a station) pre or post transition, they now have to apply for it like anyone else as if they never had post transition coverage protection and there is no guaruntees they will get it back. The Grim Reaper made his appearance. Next stop, Feb 17, 2009.

Fox,

GREAT post. There is one thing I noticed, however: after the third channel election process and up until February, DTV stations who have VHF-LO channel (2-6) designations had the opportunity to go to VHF-HI or UHF stations, as well as those who couldn't maximize due to interference from other stations, or international border issues.. Those stations have NOT showed up on this list yet, as far as I can see. I hope the FCC gets those out soon.

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #68 of 7371 Old 05-20-2007, 02:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 14,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Like I said, this proceeding only dealt with the July 2005/6 waiver deadlines, not channel election. That is a different proceeding. Stations still are required to have something on the air digitally now no matter what channel they ultimately wind up on if they want to maintain analog coverage post transition. The question is how much coverage will they be allowed to have post transition. That is the crux of this proceeding not what channel it is on.

Don't get confused between the FCC proceedings. They are tackling one issue at a time so from the outside it looks disjointed, but there is a central goal in the end. It is just being handled in a typical government fashion, SNAFUed.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #69 of 7371 Old 05-20-2007, 11:04 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxeng View Post

Like I said, this proceeding only dealt with the July 2005/6 waiver deadlines, not channel election. That is a different proceeding. Stations still are required to have something on the air digitally now no matter what channel they ultimately wind up on if they want to maintain analog coverage post transition. The question is how much coverage will they be allowed to have post transition. That is the crux of this proceeding not what channel it is on.

Don't get confused between the FCC proceedings. They are tackling one issue at a time so from the outside it looks disjointed, but there is a central goal in the end. It is just being handled in a typical government fashion, SNAFUed.

Gotcha. It is good that they are doing this in order, but they do need to hurry up!
We both know you can't just crawl up a tower, put on a side-mount antenna or replace a top one in a few hours, come back down and throw a switch and that's the end of the transition.

Don't ya wish it were that easy (and cheap), though?

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #70 of 7371 Old 05-21-2007, 02:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Haven't had the time to do much studying of the new DTV documents up on FCC site yet ..

But, from what I have read so far, I do hope they find a way to handle some of the stuff in efficient and timely manner regarding analog shut off and say, digital stations that will be moving to a different channel allocation(some their current analog channel allocation, some not), and/or will be moving the DTV transmitting antenna to top of tower/etc ---- As it may pertain to the folks who will need to prioritize things, such as say, for doing the scheduling for tower crews+the work that has to be done before Feb 2009 ....

Hope this isn't too OT for this thread(as I don't think this topic "needs" a thread to itself), but I do find paragraph 117+118 of the 3rd DTV review NPRM regarding A65/C PSIP interesting ... Particularly involving the comments about detailed EPG info in the PSIP EIT's versus what they said in paragraph 152 of 2nd DTV Report and order ....

In the quotes below, I have bolded the items I find particularly "interesting" regarding this matter .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCC 3rd DTV review NPRM, paragraph 117+118 View Post


118. Since Section 73.682(d) was revised in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, ATSC has updated the ATSC PSIP standard; the current version is A/65-C. This new revision further enhances the PSIP standard and support for delivery of data. The updated ATSC PSIP standard now requires broadcasters to populate the Event Information Tables (EITs) with accurate information about each event and to update the EIT if more accurate information becomes available. Currently, under version A/65-B, many broadcasters provide only general information in the EIT tables. For example, a network affiliate may provide network programming as the descriptor for the majority of its program offerings. We propose to update Section 73.682(d) to reflect these revisions to the ATSC PSIP standard since the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order. We seek comment on this proposal. In particular, we request input regarding the burden that compliance with A/65-C would place on broadcasters - especially small broadcasters.

119. We also seek comment from broadcasters and others as to the need to include more accurate, detailed, and up-to-date information about each event under this new PSIP standard. We also seek comment about whether PSIP information is being passed through to cable and satellite subscribers. If satellite carriers are not passing through PSIP information, is the information otherwise being reflected adequately in the electronic program guide and signal they provide to subscribers?

And, here's some of what it says from 2nd DTV review, portion of paragraph #152 :

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCC 2nd DTV Review R&O paragraph #152 View Post


152. We conclude that adoption of ATSC A/65B (PSIP) into our broadcast transmission standards will serve the public interest. As pointed out by commenters, during the development of PSIP, the ATSC carefully considered which elements of PSIP should be mandatory and which should be optional. Further, based its experience with the deployment of over 180 PSIP systems, Harris states that it is not aware of any difficulties that are experienced by either the broadcaster or the viewing consumer if the ATSC A/65B PSIP standard is properly implemented. We find the cost to broadcasters of implementing PSIP will be minor in comparison to the overall costs of converting to DTV and will provide many options to expand on the investments they have made to convert to DTV. We therefore require that broadcasters fully implement PSIP to the extent that ATSC A/65B requires. In order to give broadcasters adequate time to come into compliance, this requirement shall take effect 120 days after publication in the Federal Register. We expect broadcasters to populate the required tables and descriptors with the proper information to help receivers assemble functioning guides. All tables and descriptors that require one time setup should be set correctly, including TSID, Short Channel Name, Service Type, Modulation Mode, Source ID, and Service Location Descriptor. ATSC A/65B also requires that broadcasters send populated EITs covering at least a 12 hour period. These EITs should be populated with the correct information, so that the user knows what programs are on for this 12 hour period. Also, we expect that manufacturers will have every incentive to build equipment that looks to PSIP for its basic functionality, but we will revisit the issue if necessary. Standardized use of the data transmitted through PSIP will ensure that the full benefits and innovations of the new digital system will be available to the public.

Having read that from 2nd DTV review, previously --- I had thought that broadcasters were already required to populate the EIT's with info out 12 hours that is significantly detailed so that "the user knows what programs are on for this 12 hour period." ....... I personally don't think incorrect, no programming info whatsoever or "networking programming" that I often see in the EIT's from many stations quite meets that current requirement, or at least the way I read it ...

HOWEVER, OTOH, I personally don't think it's necessarily quite right for broadcasters to be required to provide the detailed EPG info if users equipment doesn't support it ....As for instance, at least from what I've seen so far, there is quite a bit of consumer equipment out there that doesn't display any EPG info via the PSIP EIT's, and even less of it that does in a way that allows you to see a "guide" that goes out 12 hours ....

If broadcasters are, or are going to be required to provide detailed EPG info via PSIP, it seems to me the receivers should be required to implement it as well .... Including, say, ATSC receivers which are included with DBS receivers - at least in any such cases that may exist, if say the subscriber is "required" to subscribe to say, LiL in order to get the EPG info from the sat provider, shouldn't they also have the option to Not sub to LiL and be able/allowed to receive the EPG info via PSIP EIT's(albeit only out 12 hours currently) OTA ,rather than being "forced" to sub to LiL to get any EPG info from the sat provider?

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #71 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 02:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Given this is upcoming DTV table of allotments thread .....

Update to below : - Oops! Don't know how I missed it before .... Just noticed The 7th Futher notice of proposed rulemaking including current proposed post-transistion table of allotments described farther below is in fact avaialable for much easier downloading(and with much more "Readable" text) than described below via the links for the documents with 10/20/06 date at :

http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/

But, you won't find the later comments submitted to FCC regarding the matter such as affigatt mentions in later post ....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reading a bit more of 3rd DTV review NPRM, I realized FCC's current "proposed" Post-transistion DTV table of allotments was proposed in "7th further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (7thNPRM), MB Docket No. 87-268. The proposal was adopted by FCC on 10/10/2006.

I don't know if it is available anywhere else yet at this point+assume it will be once the new DTV table is finalized, and I expect most will be happy to wait until that happens regarding any possible changes from the current proposed table ---- which I'd personally think will probably be fairly soon --- for instance, it appears the New DTV table certianly will be added to the rules in CFR 47 part 73.622 at some point ---

But, for anyone interested(who hasn't already found it) in seeing it or some of the comments submitted by interested parties to FCC regarding the proposed post-transistion DTV table, I found the text of the 7thNPRM regarding this matter including the proposed DTV table of allotments via the ECFS (Electronic Comment Filing System) search page by doing the following :

A). Going to FCC ECFS search page and typing in "87-268" for "#1.) Proceeding",

B). Finding one of the entries from 10/10/06 posted from FCC and classifed as "NPRM" (107 pages) - Note, there are two entries, but I think the 5 "view" links under each entry are the same files for each "entry", and you could the 5 links for either entry+get the same info. --

Note: 100 "entries" or "records" are shown on each page, currently(5/22/07) the 7thNPRM+Proposed DTV table can be found on the third page (which has Record # 201~300) ... It will of course get pushed back "farther" as more comments/entries/etc. for this proceeding are added .... As you can see, this proceeding(In the matter of Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service")has over 3500 records so far, dating back to 1987 .....

C.) Right clicking on each of the "view" links for the entry described in "B" above, and choosing "save file as" in my browser then assigning my own "understandable" file name for each PDF file+saving to disk ... Note: The file sizes range from 328KB to 1.5MB, Most of the text in the NPRM is in the file at the top "left" view link, with the remainder having appendix B, the Table listing by state(with ERP listed/etc), as well as a "simpler" listing of the DTV allocations by state/community. Note #2: You should also be able to click on the View link+if installed on your system, Acrobat reader should open the file for viewing if you don't want to save it to disk and just want to view it ...

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #72 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 03:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
afiggatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 4,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

A). Going to FCC ECFS search page and typing in "87-268" for "#1.) Proceeding",

B). Finding one of the entries from 10/10/06 posted from FCC and classifed as "NPRM" (107 pages) - Note, there are two entries, but I think the 5 "view" links under each entry are the same files for each "entry", and you could the 5 links for either entry+get the same info. --

Good find. There are a huge number of documents there. I skimmed the list looking for major corporations.

Random spot checking turned up this one concerning WPVI-DT ABC 6 in Philly (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6518723091). Looks like WPVI-DT will be going with VHF 6 as their permanent DTV channel.

There is this document from CBS on WBBM-DT 2 in Chicago (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6518723075). So they want WBBM-DT to switch to VHF 12 rather than VHF 11 for better coverage? Does not affect post transition antenna selection in the Chicago area, but would the FCC accept this change at this late date?
afiggatt is offline  
post #73 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 04:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by afiggatt View Post

There are a huge number of documents there. I skimmed the list looking for major corporations.

Yeah ... You could spend a long time looking through these things, especially say this entire proceeding as a whole, or say if you look into other proceedings such as the one on BPL ....

In this case, regarding the proposed DTV table It's certianly nice when station callsign of particular interest shows up in the "filed on behalf of"/etc line ... One that I had looked at regarding a station in my area was only about a very minor correction some info regarding antenna pattern.

I think It is also one interesting "window" into how FCC works. Especially if you read through some of the comments and follow things through to the R&O involved, and especially if it's an issue your interested in (your comments/questions regarding the CBS submission concerning WBBM-DT for instance)... And it's no wonder, given all the stuff on their plate how long it can seem at times for them to get to the R&O stage ...

In the past when looking at these things for other proceedings, I've just generally "clicked on"+looked at the info I've guessed might have the most interesting or relevant comments ... Then again, sometimes it's also interesting at times to see the comments submitted by individuals as well .... Some of those, how shall I say it .... can be quite humorous, others can be quite "on the mark" and detailed ...

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #74 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 05:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by afiggatt View Post

There is this document from CBS on WBBM-DT 2 in Chicago (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6518723075). So they want WBNM-DT to switch to VHF 12 rather than VHF 11 for better coverage? Does not affect post transition antenna selection in the Chicago area, but would the FCC accept this change at this late date?

Good catch! Had to look up some of the details on that before commenting .....

I wouldn't want to comment on whether or not they are going to actually allow/implement the change in the table ... But, I will say in regards to the details I am aware of(and I'm likely not aware of everything of interest) --- as it applies to their particular case+regarding paragraph 25 of the FNPRM on this matter(as they mention in that document) :

I think in this particular case, as it seems to be allowed for them regarding the specifics spelled out in that paragraph # 25 --- It seems to me they certianly are "allowed" to make their case on it to the point that perhaps FCC will/should consider it to some degree .... Which, BTW, "generally" speaking seems to me(again albeit coming from a perspective of someone who probably doesn't have all the facts) to be a good/viable case, if, in case they are any such "issues" of interest --- they can work out any interference issues I may not be "fully" aware of ... But, that's just my opinion at this point more than anything else ...

I made a particular note regarding possibility of "interference issues" concerning WBBM on 12, above, because as it turns out currently there's are at least a couple more entertaining "chapters" to this story regarding CBS proposal to move WBBM-DT to 12 you might want to read here :

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6518908204

And here :

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6518912330

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #75 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 07:03 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Jeff and Afiggett,

Nice job finding those! posted the news on the Chicago OTA board, giving you full credit for your finds. That's excellent! WBBM and WREX will go from the worst signals in their markets, to possibly and quite arguably the best. I really hope that BOTH go through. Come on, FCC, do the right thing and approve both these apps...with a slight mod to WREX-DT's transmit pattern so they don't interfere
with WBBM.

Whoo hoo! I can't believe I'm reading this! I wouldn't have to put up a monster antenna to get them. That would be nice...

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #76 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 08:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
^ Having followed the situation a bit regarding WBBM digital over the years .... I understand why you want to be optimistic about it, and no offense meant ----

But dude, be careful!

I don't think we have any evidence whatsoever at this point the CBS proposal for WBBM-DT on 12 might be approved ... It's just a proposal, these things are submitted all the time, and certianly the commenters involved are often very biased about what is best for them and their interests ....

This is *very* complicated issue for them, and I think we want to be very careful that we don't spread any misinformation about it ....

It might not fly at all, and for instance, in addition to reading those comments from EFCS, I'd also encourage those interested to carefully read paragraphs 25 Through 27 of 7th FNPRM for proceeding 87-268 as it may apply to this matter ...

Also, regarding your comments about WREX and some of your comments In Chicago thread ... Don't forget about WINM-DT 12 Angola, IN .... It's not all that far from chicago .... or that interference from any proposed WBBM-DT facility to those stations is just as much of a concern as interference TO WBBM facility ....

Actually, given the circumstances, perhaps especially so regarding the "burden of proof" on WBBM to show FCC that their proposal for 12 will work out --- MORE of a potential concern regarding the facilities as already specified for those stations in the current proposed DTV table, as for one thing they're already "tentatively authorized" for those ..... And, in case interference issue is a problem here, I think it would be WBBM proposed facilities that would have to prevent interference to those already "tentatively approved" facilities for those stations, not the other way around ...

Right now, one can certianly "hope", but personally I think I'd probably "plan" on them being on 11 post-transistion with the 1.8KW ERP facilities specified for them in the current proposed post-transistion DTV table ... You know, plan for the worst, Hope for the best

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #77 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 09:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US | Age: 25
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA Send a message via Yahoo to Trip in VA
I'm picking through this data right now. Some stations did apply to move off their VHFs, including:

KCWX-2, TCD was 5, wants 8.
KJNP-4/20, TCD was 4, wants 20.
WOAY-4/50, TCD was 4, wants 50.

I'm about to go to bed and finish picking through this tomorrow, but there are more where those came from. I have a list of a number of allocation changes that I'll post up TOMORROW.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is offline  
post #78 of 7371 Old 05-22-2007, 11:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
dlnester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Olathe, Kan.
Posts: 800
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In reference to foxeng's post:

Wichita Falls is in Texas, not Kansas :-)
dlnester is offline  
post #79 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 03:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 14,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 39
That listing was a cut and paste directly from the FCC notice so if I listed it wrong, the FCC posted it wrong, which they have been noted for, especially getting cities in the wrong states when you have a North or South something.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #80 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 03:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US | Age: 25
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA Send a message via Yahoo to Trip in VA
Alright, here's everything from that data that's not either a minor correction or a request for a power boost:

KFJX-14 Pittsburg, KS wants 13 (with KOAM-DT's equipment)
KCWX-2 Fredericksburg, TX wants 8 (current TCD is 5)
New-29 Gainesville, FL wants 9 (claims interference on 29)
WTVF-5/56 Nashville, TN wants 22 kW instead of 4.28 kW on channel 5
New-18 Mobile, AL wants 23
WDCP-19/18 University Center, MI will go silent in 2009 since WDCQ-DT 15 covers both areas
A number of petitioners want the FCC to assign 26 (non-comm) to Tulsa, OK
A number of petitioners (including Pappas) want the FCC to assign 35 to Owensboro, KY
KJNP-4/20 North Pole, AK wants 20 instead of 4
KBDI-12/38 Boulder, CO wants 13 instead of 38 (for about the third time)
New-14 Memphis, TN wants 23
KTNL-13/2 Sitka, AK wants 7 instead of 2
WOAY-4/50 Oak Hill, WV wants 50 instead of 4
KETZ-12 El Dorado, AR wants 10
WDBD-40/41 Jackson, MS wants 40 instead of 41
KEVN-7/18 Rapid City, SD wants 7 instead of 18
WMYT-55/39 Rock Hill, SC/Charlotte, NC wants 46 instead of 39 (shortspaced to WKTC-DT, WHKY-DT)
KLCW-22 Wolfforth/Lubbock, TX wants 43 instead of 22
KAYU-28/30 Spokane, WA has had coordination issues with Canada, and if their interference resolution is denied, wants 30 instead of 28
KHAS-5/21 Hastings, NE wants 45 kW instead of 2.8 kW on channel 5
KNOP-2/22 North Platte, NE wants 16 kW instead of 3.51 kW on channel 2
WFUT-68/53 Newark, NJ wants 30 instead of 41 (claims they can't build full facilities on 41)
WPVI-6/64 Philadelphia, PA wants 4.8 kW instead of about 2.5 kW on channel 6
WTHR-13/46 Indianapolis, IN wants more power on 13, if FCC declines to grant it to them, they want 46 instead of 13
Wisconsin Public Television wants vacant 27 in Duluth reassigned to 47 to avoid potential interference with WHWC-DT 27
WSWP-9/53 Grandview, WV wants 20 kW instead of 2.5 kW on channel 10; WVFX-DT in Clarksburg objects

Those are all the interesting things I saw besides the WBBM thing. Others were corrections or requests for increased power.

The last thing I saw of interest was one document from an independent person who requests that the FCC move stations on 11, 19, and 50 in either Madison or Chicago. He proposes alternative frequencies. 11 may be a moot point, but his proposal is pretty interesting regardless. I'm curious as to whether the FCC will consider it.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is offline  
post #81 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 08:01 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

^ Having followed the situation a bit regarding WBBM digital over the years .... I understand why you want to be optimistic about it, and no offense meant ----

But dude, be careful!

Right now, one can certianly "hope", but personally I think I'd probably "plan" on them being on 11 post-transistion with the 1.8KW ERP facilities specified for them in the current proposed post-transistion DTV table ... You know, plan for the worst, Hope for the best

Jeff,

No offense taken, and I understand. But, I can tell you this. The FCC wants everyone off of 2-6. And, they want everyone to have a great signal wherever possible. WBBM has met 3 of the 3 criteria to make this happen: They're currently on a VHF-LO signal, and their new station won't allow them to maximize...and in fact, they have *10%+* interference with another channel (WWTO-DT)! And, they have been helping the FCC with testing VHF-LO DTV signals...which we all know now is a flop. The FCC has explicitly stated that ANY of these three conditions will get you off of your channel to another one. Given the 3 factors above, and that channel 12 is essentially wide open with 0.1% interference vs. 10.3% interference, and that no one else is contesting the usage of the channel in the area, it would be inconsistent and insane for the FCC to do otherwise. Yes, it is possible the FCC could deny it, but I very, very seriously doubt it.

As for WREX going to 12 kw, that is doable, but less likely to happen until after 2009. They are not on a VHF-LO channel, they are allowed to maximize, and they certainly can broadcast at higher power. BUT, they also stayed at STA (low) power until they absolutely had to go to full. That is a negative in the FCC's eyes.
Now, I really DO hope they get it, but I am far less confident on their power increase happening.

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #82 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 08:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Comments in this post deleted regarding a particular station in my area+their ERP allocation currently+in the current proposed post-Transistion DTV table after reading through more of 3rd DTV review NPRM realizing an "oppurtunity" for them to possibly maximize coverage area/signal should come at some later point in future ....

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #83 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 03:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
afiggatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 4,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

Alright, here's everything from that data that's not either a minor correction or a request for a power boost:

Boy, that must have taken a while! Good job in digging all those stations up.

Looking at the FCC proposed rulemaking document, I was struck by the discussion for the stations with side-mounted DTV antennas while the analog antenna is on top of the tower. The side-mount is not covering the full area of the NTSC signal, so they can't get full DTV coverage until they remove the analog antenna and put the DTV antenna on top. Some of the stations mention 80% to 85% coverage with their DTV signal. But the shutdown is scheduled for the middle of winter in February when it may be impossible to do major work on the tower, especially the more remote towers stuck up on a mountain, until summer. I'm not in the business, but I would guess that if the station & tower engineers and station managers had been asked to pick a global shutdown date, they would have picked a date in summer, July or early August, when they can work on the towers (and when TV viewership is down). But Congress in the interest of political compromise picked a date in the middle of winter and in the middle of a sweeps month as well, if I am not mistaken.

But if those stations turn off their analog transmitter in February, 2009, they may get stuck with a reduced DTV coverage until the summer of 2009. To quote the FCC document:
"To best achieve their respective transitions, however, some stations may find it desirable to reduce or terminate their analog operations before the February 17, 2009 transition date. In some cases, stations may need to reduce or end their analog service because such operations may impede construction and operation of post-transition (digital) facilities. Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to: (1) stations that would like to switch their side-mounted digital antenna with their topmounted analog antenna before the end of the transition; (2) stations that need to add a third antenna to their tower but cannot do so without reducing or ending analog service because the tower cannot support the additional weight; and (3) stations that are terminating analog service early as part of a voluntary band-clearing arrangement. We seek comment on these and other circumstances where stations can facilitate their transitions by reducing or terminating their analog service in advance of the transition deadline."

I think most people have been assuming that almost all the analog stations will stay on the air until February 17, 2009 and then, WHAM, they go dark. If the low cost converters actually do start to show up in early 2008, become widely available at the B&M stores by mid-2008, and people have several months to get one, then the critical need to maintain the analog signal starts to go away. So rather than one big shutdown day for almost all the full power stations, are we going to see a increasing trickle of analog shutdowns starting up in later 2008 before winter kicks in? The FCC is certainly opening the door to that. Comments anyone?
afiggatt is offline  
post #84 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 03:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa (We'll be back)
Posts: 2,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxeng View Post

That listing was a cut and paste directly from the FCC notice so if I listed it wrong, the FCC posted it wrong, which they have been noted for, especially getting cities in the wrong states when you have a North or South something.

Yeah, gotta beware of that. On one chart a few years ago, I swear I saw a listing for a "WHO" in "Moline, Indiana."

Views are strictly my own unless otherwise noted.
"ItÂs looking more like Y2K than the Bay of Pigs." - FCC Commissioner Adelstein, 6-13-09, on the DTV switch
dline is offline  
post #85 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 03:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 14,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 39
My favorate was in the status of DTV stations and the FCC listed the Sinclair ABC affiliate here as "SOUTH" Carolina instead of North Carolina. Now THAT was a doozy!

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #86 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 05:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa (We'll be back)
Posts: 2,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A few other comments from the FCC database:

- KEVN, Rapid City, SD: Selected channel 18 for its post-transition DT rather than its analog channel 7, but due to pending bankruptcy proceedings the station is broadcasting at low power on 18 and has determined it can't fully build a full UHF DT operation. As Trip mentioned, it is seeking to change its election to 7.

- KOMU Columbia, MO: seeks to increase its post-transition ERP on channel 8 from 8.105 kW to 13 kW.

- WHDH, Boston, MA: seeks to increase its post-transition ERP on channel 7 from 16.8 kW to 30 kW and its antenna height above average terrain (HAAT) from 288 meters (960 ft.) to 305 meters (approx. 1016 ft.)

- WSVN, Miami, FL: seeks to increase its post-transition ERP on channel 7 from the 14.3 kW specified in the table to the 145 kW specified on the construction permit it was granted.

Views are strictly my own unless otherwise noted.
"ItÂs looking more like Y2K than the Bay of Pigs." - FCC Commissioner Adelstein, 6-13-09, on the DTV switch
dline is offline  
post #87 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 06:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US | Age: 25
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA Send a message via Yahoo to Trip in VA
So I suppose the question now is: Should I go through and find all the proposed power boosts and list those as well? There were a number of them and I just sorta skipped over them last night except for the low VHF ones.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is offline  
post #88 of 7371 Old 05-23-2007, 09:10 PM
Senior Member
 
NashDigie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East of Nashville, TN
Posts: 216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

So I suppose the question now is: Should I go through and find all the proposed power boosts and list those as well? There were a number of them and I just sorta skipped over them last night except for the low VHF ones.

- Trip

Where did you find this information? I would like to look at it. Thank you for the information you have posted.

NashDigie signing off.

NashDigie signing off.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

NashDigie is offline  
post #89 of 7371 Old 05-24-2007, 07:16 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

So I suppose the question now is: Should I go through and find all the proposed power boosts and list those as well? There were a number of them and I just sorta skipped over them last night except for the low VHF ones.

- Trip

That's what this thread is for, but I know I'd appreciate it if you could! Also, with your permission, I'd like to copy your post on what channels are going where
and put it at the top of the thread, as well as power increase requests if you do that, too.

Also, I'd like to know where you are getting this as well. Thanks!

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #90 of 7371 Old 05-24-2007, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa (We'll be back)
Posts: 2,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Nitewatchman posted this link:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

That's the FCC ECFS search page. Type in "87-268" for "#1.) Proceeding."

This proceeding has been going on for years (officially, it's called "Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service"), but you mainly want the comments after 10-10-06, which is when the proposed final table of allotments was posted.

Views are strictly my own unless otherwise noted.
"ItÂs looking more like Y2K than the Bay of Pigs." - FCC Commissioner Adelstein, 6-13-09, on the DTV switch
dline is offline  
Reply Local HDTV Info and Reception

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off