[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20586-20590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10176]
[[Page 20585]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Federal Communications Commission
_______________________________________________________________________
47 CFR Part 73
Broadcast Services; Children's Television; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 1995 /
Proposed Rules
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20586]]
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MM Docket No. 93-48; FCC 95-143]
Broadcast Services; Children's Television
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice proposes a number of changes to the Commission's
rules regarding the broadcast of television programming that serves the
educational and information needs of children, in order to implement
the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA) more effectively. First,
the Commission proposes to require broadcasters to identify, on the air
and in materials provided to publishers of broadcast schedules,
programming ``specifically designed'' to educate and inform children.
The Commission also seeks comment on ways to improve the quality of,
and public access to, the information broadcasters make available
regarding their efforts in providing children's educational and
informational programming. Second, the Commission proposes to clarify
its definition of ``educational and informational programming'' by
adopting a definition of ``core'' programming. The Commission also
seeks comment on which of three alternative options for further action
should be implemented:
Commission monitoring of the amount of educational and
informational programming on the air during a specified period
following adoption of measures to improve the flow of programming
information to the public and a clarified definition; adoption of a
safe harbor processing guideline specifying an amount of core
programming that would satisfy the CTA; and adoption of a programming
standard requiring that every station be responsible for the airing of
a minimum amount of core programming in its market. The Commission also
invites comment on possible new license renewal procedures and program
sponsorship rules allowing licensees the option of meeting their
programming obligation under the CTA in part by sponsoring core
programming on other stations in their market. This action is taken to
ensure that the educational and informational needs of children are
satisfied and thus that broadcasters comply with the CTA.
DATES: Comments are due by June 16, 1995, and reply comments are due by
July 17, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Conley, Mass Media Bureau, (202)
776-1653.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in MM Docket No. 93-48, FCC 95-
143, adopted April 5, 1995, and released April 7, 1995. The complete
text of this NPRM is available for inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's
copy contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800,
2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.
Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rule Making
1. Through this NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on several
proposals aimed at providing licensees with clear, simple, and fair
guidance regarding their children's programming obligation, to
facilitate compliance with the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA
or Act). The CTA was enacted to ``increase the amount of educational
and informational broadcast television programming for children.''\1\
In response to this mandate, the Commission earlier adopted a Report
and Order in MM Dockets 90-570 and 83-670 (56 FR 19611, April 29, 1991)
and a Memorandum Opinion and Order in the same proceeding (56 FR 42707,
August 29, 1991), establishing rules which implemented the CTA.
\1\Children's Television Act of 1989, Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, S. Rep. No. 227, 101st Cong.,
1st Sess. 1, 9 (1989) (``Senate Report'').
The other provisions of the CTA, those intended to protect
children from over commercialization of programming, are not at
issue in this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The CTA imposes an affirmative obligation on broadcast
television stations to serve the educational and informational needs of
children through not only their ``overall programming,'' but also
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's needs. The
Act requires the Commission, in evaluating its licensees' license
renewal applications, to determine whether stations have met this
obligation. The CTA also authorizes the Commission, as part of its
license renewal review process, to consider any special nonbroadcast
efforts by the licensee that enhance the educational and information
value of programming to children, and any special efforts by the
licensee to produce or support programming specifically designed to
serve the educational and informational needs of children that is
broadcast by another station in the licensee's market. Our current
rules generally incorporate the language of the statute and also define
educational and informational programming as ``programming that
furthers the positive development of children 16 years of age and under
in any respect, including the child's intellectual/cognitive or social/
emotional needs.''\2\ In addition, we require broadcasters to air some
amount of standard-length educational and informational programming
specifically designed for children 16 years of age and under. The
Commission has adopted no other guidelines regarding the types of
programming that may contribute to satisfying a station's renewal
review requirement, and our rules contain no requirement as to the
number of hours of educational and informational programming that
stations must broadcast or the time of day during which such
programming may be aired.
\2\47 C.F.R. 73.671 Note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. After developing some experience with the CTA, including the
review of more than 320 television license renewals, the Commission
issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) initiating this proceeding (58 FR
14367, March 17, 1993) to examine whether its children's television
rules should be revised. After careful consideration of the studies,
comments, and other information regarding the availability of
educational broadcast programming provided in response to the NOI and
in connection with the FCC's en banc hearing on children's television
held on June 28, 1994 (59 FR 22814, May 3, 1994), the Commission finds
that this evidence is insufficient to support a conclusion as to
whether or not the educational and informational needs of children are
being met, including whether the CTA and our existing regulations have
precipitated a significant increase in the amount of children's
educational and informational programming carried by commercial
broadcasters. In particular, none of the studies submitted enables us
to determine accurately what amount of programming specifically
designed to educate and inform children is currently being aired by
commercial stations.
4. Even if the Commission accepts the conclusion drawn by some
parties that the amount of educational programming on the air has
increased since implementation of our rules, the degree of that
increase appears to be quite [[Page 20587]] modest at best. Thus, the
Commission is not convinced that the current rules are prompting an
adequate response to the CTA. Accordingly, the Commission feels that it
would be desirable to precipitate a more substantial and significant
increase in the amount of children's educational and informational
programming--in particular, programming specifically designed to
educate and inform children--in the future.
5. In developing the rule revisions it proposes, the Commission has
followed three principles. The first principle is that judgments of the
quality of a licensee's programming, educational or otherwise, are best
made by the audience, not by the federal government. It should not be
necessary for the Commission to make such judgments if the public has
sufficient programming information to play an active role in ensuring
that the goals of the CTA are met. The provision of better programing
information to the public should give parents and others the
opportunity to influence broadcasters to air more educational
programming--by, for example, encouraging children to watch educational
programming and thereby increasing the ratings for such programming--
and should also facilitate enforcement of the CTA.
6. To improve the flow of information to the public, the Commission
proposes to require broadcasters to identify programs as educational at
the time they are aired and in materials provided to publishers of
television schedules. Such identifications need not take up large
amounts of air time or print and could be as simple as an icon.
Commenters are asked not only to discuss this specific proposal, but
also to propose any additional methods for informing the public of
upcoming children's programming. Comment is also sought on how to
improve the quality of, and public access to, the information provided
by stations regarding their efforts to provide programming specifically
designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children.
The Commission seeks comment on revising our existing rule requiring
broadcasters to place in their public inspection files annual or
quarterly reports about the children's programming they air. One
suggested change is to require broadcasters to include in these reports
the name of and method for contacting the person at the station
responsible for collecting comments on the station's compliance with
the CTA. The Commission further seeks comment on ways of rendering the
required information in an easily understandable yet comprehensive
form, and whether these reports should be required annually or
quarterly or whether stations should continue to be allowed to choose
between the two options.
7. The second principle the Commission has followed is that our
rules and processes should be as clear, simple, and fair as possible.
To this end, the Commission proposes to revise our definition of
``educational and informational'' programming. The current definition--
``programming that furthers the positive development of children 16
years of age and under in any respect, including the child's
intellectual/cognitive or social/emotional needs''--is ambiguous and
fails to give licensees clear guidance. Indeed, some licensees have
interpreted this definition to include general audience news and game
shows. Moreover, the Commission has never defined what constitutes
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational
and informational needs, even though the CTA expressly requires each
licensee to provide such programming. The Commission is concerned that
this lack of clarity has led to less than optimal compliance with the
goals of the CTA and that, unless greater specificity is provided,
noneducational programming could drive educational programming off the
air. The Commission therefore proposes to adopt a definition of
programming specifically designed to serve children's educational and
informational needs, i.e., ``core'' programming.
8. The Commission tentatively concludes that we should define
``core'' educational programming as those programs that meet the
following requirements: (1) The program is specifically designed to
meet the educational and informational needs of children ages 16 and
under (i.e., has education as a significant purpose); (2) the
educational objective of the program and the target child audience are
specified in writing in the children's programming report described
above; (3) the program is aired between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and
11:00 p.m.; (4) the program is regularly scheduled; (5) the program is
of a substantial length (e.g., 15 or 30 minutes); and (6) the program
is identified as educational children's programming at the time it is
aired, and instructions for listing it as educational programming are
provided by the licensee to program guides. The Commission seeks
comment on this definition.
9. The Commission's third principle is that broadcasters should be
guided by market forces, to the greatest extent possible, in
determining whether they meet their programming obligation by airing
shows themselves, or by sponsoring programming aired on other stations.
The program sponsorship concept, most relevant to the options discussed
below of adopting processing guidelines or programming standards, would
permit a broadcaster to better utilize other stations' children's
programming expertise, would allow some stations to develop audience
identification and programming schedules that build child audiences,
and could stimulate growth in the production of educational and
informational programming, all while reducing disincentives to airing
such programming.
10. While the Commission believes that the proposals to ensure that
the public has greater access to information and to clarify the
definition of educational and informational programming are important
steps toward promoting the goals of the CTA more effectively, the
Commission is concerned that these efforts may not suffice to serve the
educational and informational needs of children, and to bring about the
kind of measurable increase in such programming contemplated by
Congress. Accordingly, the Commission also proposes to take one of the
following three types of action.
11. The first option available to the Commission would be to
monitor the amount of broadcasted programming specifically designed to
serve the educational and informational needs of children for a
specified period of time (e.g., three years) to determine whether the
Commission's efforts to increase the flow of information to the public
and clarify our rules have caused a significant increase in such
programming. Stations would be required to submit annual descriptions
of their educational and informational programming. At the end of the
specified period, the Commission would assess the need for further
regulatory action.
12. A second option would be to establish a safe harbor
quantitative processing guideline. Such a guideline would specify an
amount of core programming that would represent one means of satisfying
the CTA's programming obligation and permit staff approval of the
children's programming portion of a license renewal application. Under
this option, if a licensee aired the prescribed amount of programming,
its license renewal application would not be reviewed further for CTA
programming compliance. The only challenges to a licensee's children's
[[Page 20588]] programming performance that would be entertained would
be those questioning the bona fides of a licensee's claim to have met
the processing guideline. A licensee that did not meet the processing
guideline would have its application referred to the Commission for
consideration and would have the opportunity to demonstrate that it had
complied with the CTA in other ways. The Commission would then evaluate
such a licensee's performance based on its overall efforts and other
circumstances. Failure to meet the guideline would thus result in
greater review of the application, but would not constitute a de facto
violation of the Commission's rules.
13. Given the results of the studies submitted in the record thus
far, and allowing for the possibility that these studies may be
somewhat flawed, the Commission is currently inclined to think that, if
a processing guideline is adopted, it should be set at 3 hours per week
of core programming, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment
on this suggestion and on whether, if a processing guideline is
adopted, it should be increased in stages over time. If the Commission
adopts a phased-in processing guideline, what should the ultimate level
of the guideline be, and over what period of time should it be phased
in? One possibility would be to increase the guideline by increments of
the half hour each year until reaching a level of 5 hours of core
programming per week.
14. A third option would be to establish a standard requiring that
every station be responsible for the airing of a minimum amount of core
programming in its market. Stations meeting this requirement would
qualify for staff approval of the children's programming portion of
their license renewal application. Those not meeting the standard would
have their applications referred to the Commission for determination of
the appropriate remedy. Notwithstanding failure to meet the standard,
the Commission could hold that the licensee had in fact complied with
the CTA's requirements. However, a licensee failing to meet a standard
would have a much heavier burden to show that it complied with the CTA
than would be the case if it did not meet a processing guideline. Thus,
a licensee failing to meet a standard would have to make a compelling
showing that the qualifying programming it did air, along with any of
its other programming-related activities in its market, served the
educational and informational needs of children in that market as well
as or better than an additional amount of programming specifically
designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children.
Again, the Commission believes that, given the current level of
programming documented by the data submitted, the appropriate level of
a programming requirement would be 3 hours of core programming per
week, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment on this
suggestion and, as with the option of a processing guideline,
interested parties are invited to comment on whether it would be
appropriate to increase the requirement by, for example, one half hour
each year until a requirement of 5 hours of core programming per week
is established. A programming standard, or rule, may be easier to
administer and would give the Commission a broader range of sanctions
than a processing guideline. The Commission solicits comment on these
and other factors differentiating a processing guideline from a
standard.
15. There are a number of questions on which the Commission seeks
comment that are raised by both the option of a safe harbor processing
guideline and that of a programming standard. First, comment is sought
on the Commission's suggestion of a weekly processing guideline or
programming standard averaged over a specified period, and the
Commission asks for ideas as to the period of time over which a
guideline or standard should be averaged. The Commission also seeks
comment on the extent to which repeats during a weekly schedule and
later reruns of programs should be counted toward fulfillment of any
processing guideline or programming requirement that might be adopted.
Second, the Commission seeks comment as to whether a processing
guideline or programming requirement should be the same for all
stations regardless of station type or market size. Third, it has been
publicly suggested that to give stations an incentive to air high-
quality programming, a programming requirement should be based entirely
on a certain amount of rating points. The Commission invites comment on
this suggestion and on whether it would be appropriate for either a
processing guideline or a programming standard.
16. Finally, interested parties are asked to provide the Commission
with further data and related information. The Commission requests in
particular detailed information regarding any potential opportunity
costs (i.e., the difference in profits from children's educational
programming and from other programming that might be aired instead) for
broadcasters that would be created by the implementation of a
processing guideline or programming requiring set at various levels.
More specifically, the Commission requests that commenters provide us
with one or more studies that quantify any such costs for stations in
different sized markets, as well as for the broadcasting industry as a
whole. The Commission urges commenters to ensure that the sample data
used to develop estimates of any opportunity costs that stations might
face are representative and that the methodology used to develop the
estimates is clearly explained. The Commission also reiterates to all
interested parties the importance of providing information and studies,
in addition to those already on record, documenting changes in the
nature and amount of children's educational programming on the air,
especially recently. In providing such studies, commenters should bear
in mind that the utility of the material already presented to us in
this inquiry is limited. For example, the results of certain station
surveys accept at face value station claims as to the educational
consent of their programming, and our experience with such claims
suggests that the figures produced by these studies may be inflated.
The Commission notes that if data were submitted that show that the
educational and informational needs of children are being met
consistent with the goals of the CTA, we would reassess the need for
further action.
17. In weighing alternatives for further Commission action, the
Commission must consider any limitations imposed by the First Amendment
of the Constitution. Even assuming that the Commission's proposals were
found to be content-based restrictions on speech, some restrictions on
content have been judged permissible when applied to broadcasting
because of the scarcity of frequencies and broadcasters' concomitant
duty to provide public service. To be consistent with the First
Amendment, content-based restrictions on speech in the broadcasting
context must be narrowly tailored to further a substantial government
interest. The Commission tentatively concludes, and the case law
suggests, that the government has a substantial interest in furthering
the education and welfare of children through implementation of the
CTA. The courts have held that there is a compelling government
interest in ``safeguarding the physical and psychological well being of
a minor.''\3\ [[Page 20589]] The legislative history of the CTA states
that ``[i]t is difficult to think of an interest more substantial than
the promotion of the welfare of children who watch so much television
and rely upon it for so much of the information they receive.''\4\ The
Commission seeks comment on whether each of the proposed alternatives
for improving implementation of the CTA is narrowly tailored to further
the CTA's interest in furthering the education and welfare of children
and on its analysis of First Amendment issues as discussed in
paragraphs 66 through 73 in the full text of this NPRM.
\3\Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 852 F.2d 1332, 1343
n. 18 (D.C. Cir. 1988) and Supreme Court Cases cited therein.
\4\Senate Report at 17; see also House Report at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. The Commission also seeks comment on possible revisions to our
license renewal procedures that might encourage the public to take a
more active role in urging stations to comply with the CTA and reduce
the government's role in reviewing such compliance. Thus, the
Commission seeks comment on whether it should require any party filing
a petition to deny to show that he or she had first attempted to
resolve the alleged problem with the station in question, and whether,
if we implement a safe harbor processing guideline or a programming
standard licensees should be permitted to certify whether they have
aired the prescribed amount of core programming.
19. Finally, the Commission solicits comment on a number of general
and specific issues regarding ``program sponsorship'' rules. If the
Commission adopts either a safe harbor processing guideline or a
programming standard, such rules would give licensees the option of
either themselves airing the entire prescribed amount of children's
educational programming, or airing a portion of the prescribed amount
themselves and taking responsibility for the remainder by providing
financial or other ``in-kind'' support for programming aired on other
stations in their market. The station sponsoring educational programs
shown elsewhere would take credit for these programs at license renewal
time. We conclude that the CTA precludes allowing a licensee to meet
either a processing guideline or programming standard entirely by
sponsoring programming on other stations in the same market. The
Commission thus suggests that under either option each station be
required to air at least 1 hour of core educational and informational
programming itself and that each be allowed to fulfill the remaining
hours by sponsoring core programming on other stations. The Commission
also seeks comment on the tentative views expressed in the full text of
the NPRM regarding how a program sponsorship system should work. The
CTA and the Commission's rules already permit stations to receive
credit at license renewal time for supporting educational programming
on another station in their market, and the Commission has held that if
one station produces or buys children's programs broadcast on another
station, so as to qualify under 47 U.S.C. 303b(b)(2), both stations may
rely on such programming in their license renewal applications. The
Commission now seeks comment on whether that holding was correct, or
whether it undermines the CTA by permitting ``double counting.'' It
appears that, at least for the purpose of meeting a processing
guideline or programming requirement, stations that air sponsored
programming (``host'' stations) should not be permitted to claim credit
for such programming.
20. It is also the Commission's view that a station should be
allowed to sponsor programs for the purpose of meeting a processing
guideline or programming requirement only on host stations that serve
largely the same potential viewers. On the other hand, the Commission
does not believe that we should require sponsor and host stations to
serve exactly the same area because such a requirement would unduly
limit the program sponsorship options available in many markets. Taking
into account these competing considerations, it would seem sensible to
require that, when any portion of a station's programming that is
claimed to satisfy a processing guideline or programming requirement
consists of programming shown on another station, the signal of the
host station cover 80 percent of either the community of license or the
area encompassed within the grade A or grade B contour of the sponsor
station. The Commission seeks comment on these ideas and on other
issues relevant to program sponsorship. For example, the Commission
asks for comment on what types of information about sponsored programs
should be provided to the public, and whether antitrust law would limit
the extent to which stations in a market may cooperate through program
sponsorship efforts.
21. If the Commission adopts either a processing guideline or a
programming standard, we would intend that the resulting regulatory
changes would be made on a provisional or experimental basis, rather
than as permanent changes. It is the Commission's hope that any such
guideline or standard, together with the other changes we propose, will
effectuate a significant improvement in television broadcasters'
service to children, and also will enable parents to monitor the
performance of stations in their communities and ensure through their
actions that the CTA's objectives are met. In accordance with these
expectations, and to ensure periodic review of the necessity and
efficacy of a guideline or standard, the Commission invites comment on
whether to sunset any regulatory changes related to the possible
implementation of either of these two options, absent additional
Commission action, on December 31, 2004, unless affirmatively extended
by the Commission. This date is one year after the close of the renewal
cycle for the last group of stations to come up for renewal after rules
would be adopted in this proceeding, and would allow the Commission,
prior to the sunset, the opportunity to evaluate fully the effects of
any rules adopted here. Thus, it would be our intention to undertake a
review prior to the sunset date.
22. In conclusion, with this proceeding, the Commission intends to
enhance the public's ability to monitor station compliance with the
CTA, to clarify its rules and policies governing educational
programming for children to provide licensees with greater certainty as
to the scope of their children's programming obligation, and to ensure
that the amount of educational and informational programming provided
by television broadcasters comports with the goals of the CTA. The
Commission believes that these objectives can be achieved by increasing
the flow of information to the public about the children's programming
that stations are broadcasting, and by adopting a definition of
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational
and informational needs. In addition, we intend to take further
action--in the form of instituting monitoring procedures, processing
guidelines or a programming standard--in order to ensure that all
children have access, as Congress intended, to an adequate supply of
educational and informational programming specifically designed for
them. The Commission seeks comment on all aspects of our proposals, and
welcomes other ideas commenters may have to achieve the objectives
outlined herein.
V. Administrative Matters
23. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested
parties may file comments on or before June 16, 1995, and reply
comments on or before July 17, 1995. To file formally in this
[[Page 20590]] proceeding, you must file an original plus four copies
of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want
each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must
file an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply
comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,
Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available
for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC
Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20554.
24. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the
Commission Rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203 and 1.1206(a).
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement
I. Reason for the Action
This proceeding was initiated to explore ways to implement the
Children's Television Act of 1990 more effectively.
II. Objective of This Action
The actions proposed in this NPRM are intended to give licensees
clear, simple, and fair guidance regarding their children's programming
obligation; to increase the flow of programming information to the
public to facilitate enforcement of the Children's Television Act of
1990; and to allow the marketplace to determine to the fullest extent
possible the means that licensees use to meet their programming
obligation. Other objectives are to increase the amount of available
television broadcast programming that meets the educational and
informational needs of children and to promote efficiency in the
production and distribution of such programming.
III. Legal Basis
Authority for the actions proposed in this NPRM may be found in
Sections 1 and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. 151, 303; and Section 103 of the Children's Television Act of
1990, 47 U.S.C. 303b.
IV. Number and Type of Small Entities Affected by the Proposed Rules
Approximately 1,200 existing commercial television broadcasters of
all sizes may be affected by the proposals contained in this NPRM.
V. Reporting, Record-keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
Inherent in the Proposed Rule
The NPRM seeks comment on modifying current record-keeping and
reporting requirements to include a requirement that licensees
demonstrate compliance with proposed rule changes in their children's
programming report, and seeks comment on requiring licensees to make
programming information more accessible to the public. The NPRM seeks
comment on whether stations should be required to separate their
children's programming reports from other material in the public
inspection file and broadcast announcements to alert the public of the
existence of such reports. It also seeks comment on a certification
requirement that would replace the current requirement for submission
of detailed documentation to the Commission for those stations able to
certify that they have met a safe harbor processing guideline or
programming standard.
VI. Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rule
None.
VII. Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small
Entities and Consistent With the Stated Objectives of the Action
The proposals contained in this NPRM are designed to encourage
television broadcast programming that satisfies the requirements of the
Children's Television Act of 1990, while minimizing the impact on small
entities.
25. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) of the expected impact on small entities of the proposals
suggested in this document. Written public comments are requested on
the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same
filing deadlines as comments on the rest of this NPRM, but they must
have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to
the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Secretary shall send a
copy of this Notice of Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a)
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5
U.S.C. Section 601 et seq (1981).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Television broadcasting.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10176 Filed 4-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
