Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 DA 07-820 February 23, 2007 Michael E. Carosella QUALCOMM Incorporated 5775 Morehouse Drive San Diego, CA 92121 Re: WPZA238, Indianapolis, IN ULS File No. 0002786925 Dear Mr. Carosella, On October 16, 2006, you filed an FCC Form 601 application for modification of station WPZA238, seeking authorization to operate on TV Channel 55 in the Indianapolis, IN area.1 Your application incorporates consent from two broadcasters, pursuant to section 27.60(b)(1)(iv) of the Commission’s rules.2 This rule section permits a 700 MHz Band licensee to obtain the written concurrence of a co-channel or adjacent channel TV/DTV broadcaster, whereby the incumbent broadcaster consents to accept higher levels of interference than the rule otherwise permits, subject to Commission approval.3 Your application includes a copy of a consent agreement between QUALCOMM Incorporated (“QUALCOMM”) and GOCOM Media of Illinois, LLC (“GOCOM”) licensee of WRSP-TV, analog channel 55, in Springfield, Illinois. In the agreement, GOCOM has agreed to accept potential interference to 5.48% of the population in the Grade B contour of WRSP-TV licensed facilities (BLCT- 20030627AAF). We note that this interference represents the total amount of interference that WRSP-TV will experience from QUALCOMM’s operations in Indianapolis, Chicago, and St. Louis, and that GOCOM’s consent covers QUALCOMM’s operations in all three markets. We previously granted 1 The application was amended, under the same ULS file number, on October 17 and 27, 2006; November 13 and 28, 2006; and February 6, 2007. The Commission placed the application on public notice. See Wireless Bureau Market-Based Applications Accepted for Filing, Public Notice, Report No. 2700 at 3 (rel. Nov. 1, 2006). No petitions have been filed against the application. 2 See 47 C.F.R. § 27.60(b)(1)(iv). 3 This approval process involves an analysis by the Media Bureau, under delegated authority, to determine whether grant of the application is in the public interest. See Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s Rules, WT Docket No. 99-168, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 20845 (2000) (basis for public interest analysis of Lower 700 MHz consent agreements); Reallocation and Service Rules for the 698-746 MHz Spectrum Band (Television Channels 52-59), GN Docket No. 01-74, Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 1022 (2002) (framework for public interest analysis of Lower 700 MHz “band-clearing” agreements) (“Lower 700 MHz Report and Order”). Michael E. Carosella February 23, 2007 DA 07-820 2 QUALCOMM’s request to operate in St. Louis on January 19, 2007.4 QUALCOMM will operate in Chicago from multiple sites. The Commission initially authorized QUALCOMM to operate in Chicago on April 18, 2006.5 We also concurrently grant QUALCOMM’s application for additional facilities in Chicago by separate letter.6 Your application also includes a copy of a consent agreement between QUALCOMM Incorporated (“QUALCOMM”) and NEXSTAR Broadcasting, Inc. (“NEXSTAR”) licensee of WFFT- TV, channel 55, in Ft. Wayne, IN. In the agreement, NEXSTAR has agreed to accept potential interference to 1.16% of the population in the Grade B contour of WFFT-TV licensed facilities (BLCT- 20001002APS). We note that this interference level represents the total amount of interference WFFT- TV will experience from QUALCOMM’s operations in both Indianapolis and Chicago, and that NEXSTAR’s consent covers QUALCOMM’s operations in both markets. For the reasons discussed below, we find that grant of the application is in the public interest.7 First, our approval of the application will allow QUALCOMM to deploy its MediaFLO (“forward link only”) technology, a “mediacast” service capable of delivering many channels of multimedia content to third generation (“3G”) wireless phones. According to QUALCOMM, which holds licenses for Channel 55 (Block D in the Lower 700 MHz Band) covering the entire nation, MediaFLO initially will provide up to fifteen live streaming video program channels, numerous video “clip cast” channels from which subscribers can choose video clips for viewing on-demand, and numerous audio channels.8 QUALCOMM states that MediaFLO will be available at “mass market” prices for most of the nation’s over 194 million mobile phone customers, and that it will spur the development of new content and new technologies.9 QUALCOMM also intends that the network will carry local programming and core public interest program content such as breaking news, weather, and public affairs, as well as maintain network capability to disseminate emergency alert information, in both visual (including textual) and auditory form. QUALCOMM further states that its MediaFLO technology offers distinct efficiency and cost advantages in delivering content to a large mobile subscriber base, as compared to cellular and higher- frequency based systems. Moreover, as QUALCOMM notes, MediaFLO will be affordable, readily available and will stimulate new development on a large scale within the emerging technology of mobile 4 See letter to Michael E. Carosella, QUALCOMM, Inc., from Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau, and Roger S. Noel, Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, dated January 19, 2007 (DA 07-122). 5 See letter to Jennifer M. McCarthy, QUALCOMM, INC., from Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau, and Roger S. Noel, Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, dated April 18, 2006 (DA 06-870). 6 See letter to Michael E. Carosella, QUALCOMM, Inc., from Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau, and Roger S. Noel, Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, dated February 23, 2007 (DA 07-821). 7 With respect to any stations receiving interference for which consent is not provided, we note that Qualcomm’s proposed operations are in accordance with the terms of the Commission’s Order granted October 13, 2006. See Qualcomm Incorporated Petition for Declaratory Ruling, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 11683 (2006). 8 QUALCOMM Attachment to application for modification of Station WPZA238, ULS File No. 0002395142 at 5. 9 Id. Michael E. Carosella February 23, 2007 DA 07-820 3 video.10 Given that QUALCOMM’s business plan calls for an investment of $800 million, grant of this application will contribute to the growth of the American economy.11 With respect to WRSP-TV, we previously determined that the public interest would be served by approving QUALCOMM’s application to provide its MediaFLO service in the St. Louis area, which also included the consent of GOCOM to accept higher levels of interference to WRSP-TV.12 In this case, the area of interference in St. Louis and Indianapolis are the same. With respect to WFFT-TV, there are four other full service television stations licensed to Fort Wayne, and the entire area of agreed-upon interference is served by no fewer than eight other TV/DTV stations and as many as 17 stations. While WFFT-TV is a Fox affiliate, the area of agreed-upon interference is served by another Fox affiliate, WSJV-TV/DT, in the South Bend-Elkhart, Indiana DMA. In addition, almost all of this area is outside the Fort Wayne DMA; in fact, only 0.22% of the population within the DMA is predicted to receive interference. Accordingly, we believe that the public interest will be served by a grant of QUALCOMM’s application, conditioned upon operating within the technical parameters specified in the application, and in accordance with all of the Agreements listed above. Any changes to the technical parameters of the proposed facilities that will result in levels of interference greater than those agreed to in the preceding agreements referenced herein, or that result in any additional interference under the thresholds established in the Commission’s Qualcomm Order, will require separate Commission approval. Sincerely, Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief Video Division Media Bureau Roger S. Noel, Chief Mobility Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 10 Id. at 5, 6. 11 Id. at 6. 12 See supra n.4.