[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72144-72158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30009]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket Nos. 00-168; 00-44; FCC 11-162]
Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for Television
Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations; Extension of the Filing
Requirement for Children's Television Programming Report (FCC Form 398)
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on a proposed
requirement that each television station's public inspection file be
made available in an online public file to be hosted on the
Commission's Web site.
DATES: Comments for this proceeding are due on or before December 22,
2011; reply comments are due on or before January 6, 2012. Written PRA
comments on the proposed information collection requirements contained
herein must be submitted by the public, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and other interested parties on or before January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket Nos. 00-168
and 00-44, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS) Web Site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
People With Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: (202) 418-
0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection
requirements contained herein should be submitted to the Federal
Communications Commission via email to [email protected] and to Nicholas A.
Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via email to [email protected] or via fax at (202) 395-5167. For detailed
instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see the supplementary information section of this
document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Holly Saurer, [email protected] of the Media
Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-2120. For additional information
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection
requirements
[[Page 72145]]
contained in this document, send an email to [email protected] or contact
Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 11-162, adopted and released
on October 27, 2011. The full text is available for public inspection
and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center,
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., CY-A257,
Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS at
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will be available
electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete
text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th
Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative formats are
available for people with disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), by sending an email to [email protected]
or calling the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at
(202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
This document contains proposed information collection
requirements. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burden and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission invites the
general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following
information collections. Public and agency comments are due January 23,
2012.
Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment
on how we might ``further reduce the information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
To view or obtain a copy of this information collection request
(ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to this OMB/GSA Web page: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web
page called ``Currently Under Review,'' (3) click on the downward-
pointing arrow in the ``Select Agency'' box below the ``Currently Under
Review'' heading, (4) select ``Federal Communications Commission'' from
the list of agencies presented in the ``Select Agency'' box, (5) click
the ``Submit'' button to the right of the ``Select Agency'' box, and
(6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for
the OMB control number of this ICR as show in the Supplementary
Information section below (or its title if there is no OMB control
number) and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC
submission to OMB will be displayed.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0214.
Title: Sections 73.3526 and 73.3527, Local Public Inspection Files;
Sections 76.1701 and 73.1943, Political Files.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for-profit
entities; Not for-profit institutions; Individuals or households.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 25,422 respondents; 59,833
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour to 104 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement;
Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The
statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307 and 308.
Total Annual Burden: 2,158,909 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $801,150.00.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: The PIA is in progress.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Respondents may request
materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from
public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that support
the Commission's public file rules that are codified at 47 CFR 73.3526
and 73.3527. 47 CFR 73.3526 and 73.3527 require that licensees and
permittees of commercial and noncommercial AM, FM and TV stations
maintain a file for public inspection at its main studio or at another
accessible location in its community of license. The contents of the
file vary according to type of service and status. The contents
include, but are not limited to, copies of certain applications
tendered for filing, a statement concerning petitions to deny filed
against such applications, copies of ownership reports, statements
certifying compliance with filing announcements in connection with
renewal applications, a list of donors supporting specific programs,
and a list of community issues addressed by the station's programming.
These rules also specify the length of time, which varies by
document type, that each record must be retained in the public file.
The public and FCC use the data to evaluate information about the
licensee's performance and to ensure that station is addressing issues
concerning the community to which it is licensed to serve.
The proposed information collection requirements consist of:
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.1943(d), television station licensees or
applicants must place all of the contents of its political file on the
Commission's Web site.
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(b), commercial television
station licensees or applicants must place the contents of their public
inspection file as required by 47 CFR 73.3526(e) on the Commission's
Web site, with the exception of letters and emails from the public as
required by 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(9), which will be retained at the
station. A station must also link to the public inspection file hosted
on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if
the station has a Web site. The Commission will automatically link the
following items to the electronic version of all licensee and applicant
public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission has these
items electronically: authorizations, applications, contour maps;
ownership reports and related materials; portions of the Equal
Employment Opportunity file held by the Commission; the public and
broadcasting; Children's television programming reports; and DTV
transition education reports. In the event that the online public file
does not reflect such required information, the licensee will be
responsible for posting such material.
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(18), commercial television
stations must include in their public file
[[Page 72146]]
a copy of every agreement or contract involving sharing agreements for
the station, including local news sharing agreements and shared
services agreements, whether the agreement involves stations in the
same markets or in differing markets, with confidential or proprietary
information redacted where appropriate.
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(19), commercial television
stations must include in their public file a list of all sponsorship
identifications that must be announced on-air pursuant to 47 CFR
73.1212.
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3527(b) non-commercial educational
television station licensees or applicants must place the contents of
their public inspection file as required by 47 CFR 73.3527(e) on the
Commission's Web site, with the exception of letters and emails from
the public as required by 47 CFR 73.3527(e)(9), which will be retained
at the station. A station must also link to the public inspection file
hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web
site, if the station has a Web site. The Commission will automatically
link the following items to the electronic version of all licensee and
applicant public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission
has these items electronically: contour maps; ownership reports and
related materials; portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file
held by the Commission; and the public and broadcasting. In the event
that the online public file does not reflect such required information,
the licensee will be responsible for posting such material.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0174.
Title: Sections 73.1212, 76.1615 and 76.1715, Sponsorship
Identification.
Form Number: N/A.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for profit
entities; Individuals or households.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 22,761 respondents and
1,831,610 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: .0011 to .2011 hours.
Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; Third party
disclosure; On occasion reporting requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 242,633 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $33,828.
Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The
statutory authority for this collection is contained in sections 4(i),
317 and 507 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Respondents may request
materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from
public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.
Privacy Impact Assessment(s): The PIA is in progress.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that will
change the availability of record disclosures under 47 CFR 73.1212. 47
CFR 73.1212(e) states that, when an entity rather than an individual
sponsors the broadcast of matter that is of a political or
controversial nature, the licensee is required to retain a list of the
executive officers, or board of directors, or executive committee,
etc., of the organization paying for such matter in its public file.
The proposed information collection requirements consist of:
Pursuant to the changes proposed 47 CFR 73.1212(e) and 47 CFR
73.3526(e)(19), this list, which could contain personally identifiable
information, would be located in a public file to be located on the
Commission's Web site instead of being maintained in the public file at
the station. Burden estimates for this change are included in OMB
Control Number 3060-0214.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0466.
Title: Sections 73.1201, 74.783 and 74.1283, Station
Identification.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for-profit
entities; Not for-profit institutions.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 24,158 respondents; 24,158
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.166-1 hour.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement;
Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or maintain benefits. The
statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307 and 308.
Total Annual Burden: 23,324 hours.
Total Annual Costs: None.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality
required with this collection of information.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that support
the Commission's station identification announcements that are codified
at 47 CFR 73.1201. 47 CFR 73.1201(a) requires television broadcast
licensees to make broadcast station identification announcements at the
beginning and ending of each time of operation, and hourly, as close to
the hour as feasible, at a natural break in program offerings.
Television and Class A television broadcast stations may make these
announcements visually or aurally.
The proposed information collection requirements consist of:
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.1201(b)(3), three times a week, the
station identification for television stations must include a notice
stating that the station's public file is available for viewing at the
FCC's Web site. At least one of the announcements must occur between
the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight.
The Commission is seeking OMB approval for the proposed information
collection requirements.
Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking we take steps to
modernize the way television broadcasters inform the public about how
they are serving their communities. We seek comment on the proposals
set forth below. Our goals in this proceeding are to make information
concerning broadcast service more accessible to the public by taking
advantage of current technology, thereby improving dialogue between
broadcast stations and the communities they serve, and if possible
reduce the compliance burdens on broadcasters. This item also seeks to
further the goal of modernizing the Commission's processes and
expeditiously transitioning from paper to digital technology in order
to create efficiencies and reduce costs both for government and the
private sector.
2. Specifically, we propose to largely replace the decades-old
requirement that commercial and noncommercial television stations
maintain a paper public file at their main studios with a requirement
to submit documents for
[[Page 72147]]
inclusion in an online public file to be hosted by the Commission. We
seek comment on ways to streamline the information required to be kept
in the file, such as by excluding letters and emails from the public.
We also propose that we should require that sponsorship identification,
now disclosed only on-air, also be disclosed in the online public file,
and propose to require disclosure online of shared services agreements.
We seek comment on what steps we can implement in the future to make
the online public file standardized and database compatible, further
improving the usefulness of the data. The new proposals that the
Commission host the online public file and that the online file largely
replace the paper file at the main studio will meet the longstanding
goals of this proceeding, to improve public access to information about
how broadcasters are serving their communities, while at the same time
significantly reducing compliance burdens on the stations. We propose
to limit these reforms to television licensees at this time given that
this proceeding has always been limited to television broadcasters. We
will consider at a later date whether to apply similar reforms to radio
licensees.
II. Background
3. One of a television broadcaster's fundamental public interest
obligations is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests
of its community of license. Broadcasters are afforded considerable
flexibility in how they meet that obligation, but they must maintain a
public inspection file, which gives the public access to information
about the station's operations and enables members of the public to
engage in an active dialogue with broadcast licensees regarding
broadcast service. Among other things, the public inspection file must
contain an issues/programs list, which describes the ``programs that
have provided the station's most significant treatment of community
issues during the preceding three month period.'' \1\ The original
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding grew out of a prior
Notice of Inquiry, which explored the public interest obligations of
broadcast television stations as they transitioned to digital.\2\ In
the 2000 NPRM, the Commission concluded that ``making information
regarding how a television broadcast station serves the public interest
easier to understand and more accessible will not only promote
discussion between the licensee and its community, but will lessen the
need for government involvement in ensuring that a station is meeting
its public interest obligation.'' The Commission tentatively concluded
to require television stations to use a standardized form to report on
how they serve the public interest. The Commission also tentatively
concluded to require television licensees to make the contents of their
public inspection files, including the standardized form, available on
their stations' Internet Web sites or, alternatively, on the Web site
of their state broadcasters association. In 2007, the Commission
adopted a Report and Order implementing these proposals.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(12).
\2\ Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for
Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 65 FR 62683 (2000) (``NPRM''); In the Matter of
Public Interest Obligations of TV Broadcast Licensees, Notice of
Inquiry, 65 FR 4211 (1999)(``NOI'').
\3\ In the Matter of Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure
Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest
Obligations, Report and Order, 73 FR 13452 (2007) (``Report and
Order''); In the Matter of Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure
Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest
Obligations, Erratum, 73 FR 30316 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Following the release of the Report and Order, the Commission
received petitions for reconsideration from several industry
petitioners and public interest advocates. The industry petitioners
raised a number of issues regarding the standardized form and the
online posting requirement, generally contending that the requirements
were overly complex and burdensome. Public interest advocates argued
that the political file \4\ should be included in the online public
file requirement rather than exempted as provided in the Report and
Order, and that the standardized form should be designed to facilitate
the downloading and aggregation of data for researchers. In addition,
five parties appealed the Report and Order, and the cases were
consolidated in the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.
The DC Circuit granted a petition to hold the proceeding in abeyance
while we review the petitions for reconsideration. Challenging the
rules in a third forum, several parties opposed the information
collection contained in the Report and Order at the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Because of the multiple petitions for reconsideration, the Commission
has not transmitted the information collection to OMB for its approval,
and therefore the rules adopted in the Report and Order have never gone
into effect.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Sections 73.3526(e)(6), 73.3527(e)(5) and 73.1943 of the
Commission's rules require that stations keep as part of the public
inspection files a ``political file.''
\5\ See also 47 CFR 73.3526, effective date nt. 2; 47 CFR
73.3526, effective date note; 47 CFR 73.1201, effective date note 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. In June 2011, a working group including Commission staff,
scholars and consultants released ``The Information Needs of
Communities'' (``INC Report''), a comprehensive report on the current
state of the media landscape.\6\ The INC Report discussed both the need
to empower citizens to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities
in exchange for the use of public spectrum, and also the need to remove
unnecessary burdens on broadcasters who aim to serve their communities.
The INC Report provided several recommendations relevant to this
proceeding, including eliminating unnecessary paperwork and moving
toward an online system for public disclosures in order to ensure
greater public access. The INC Report also recommended requiring that
when broadcasters allow advertisers to dictate content, they disclose
the ``pay-for-play'' arrangements online as well as on the air in order
to create a permanent, searchable record of these arrangements and
afford easy access by consumers, competitors and watchdog groups to
this information. The Report also suggested that governments at all
levels collect and publish data in forms that make it easy for
citizens, entrepreneurs, software developers, and reporters to access
and analyze information in order to enable mechanisms that can present
the data in more useful formats, and noted that greater transparency by
government and media companies can help reduce the cost of reporting,
empower consumers, and foster innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``The Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media
Landscape in a Broadband Age,'' by Steven Waldman and the Working
Group on Information Needs of Communities (June 2011), available at
http://www.fcc.gov/infoneedsreport. As noted in the INC Report, the
views of the report ``do not necessarily represent the views of the
Federal Communications Commission, its Commissioners or any
individual Bureaus or Offices.'' Id. at 362.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. In the Order on Reconsideration, we conclude, in light of the
reconsideration petitions we received with respect to the Report and
Order and the comments and replies thereto, that the best course of
action is to vacate the rules adopted in the Report and Order and
develop a new record upon which we can evaluate our public file and
standardized form requirements. In this FNPRM we seek comment on some
of the proposals the parties put forth on reconsideration and other
ideas as well to improve public access to information about how
broadcasters are serving their
[[Page 72148]]
communities while minimizing the burdens placed upon broadcasters. We
also invite commenters to suggest any other changes that would promote
these goals and modernize the provision of data to the public. We note
that we are only addressing the online public file requirement in this
FNPRM. Due to the complexity of the issues surrounding the replacement
of the issues/programs list with a standardized form, we intend to
promptly issue a separate Notice of Inquiry in a new docket seeking
comment on the standardized form. We ask commenters to limit the
comments filed in this docket to those related to the online posting
requirement.
III. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
7. In this FNPRM, we seek input on how to create a modernized
online public file requirement that increases public accessibility
while taking into account and reducing where possible the burdens
placed on broadcasters. First, we propose to largely replace the paper
public file requirement with an online public file to be hosted by the
Commission. We then seek comment on ways to streamline the information
required to be kept in the file, and whether new items, such as
sponsorship identifications and shared services agreements, should be
disclosed online. We also seek comment on what steps we can implement
in the future to make the online public file standardized and database
compatible.
A. Placing the Public File Online
8. The Commission first adopted a public inspection file rule more
than 40 years ago. The public file requirement grew out of Congress'
1960 amendment of sections 309 and 311 of the Communications Act of
1934 (the ``Act'').\7\ Finding that Congress, in enacting these
provisions, was guarding ``the right of the general public to be
informed, not merely the rights of those who have special interests,''
\8\ the Commission adopted the public inspection file requirement to
``make information to which the public already has a right more readily
available, so that the public will be encouraged to play a more active
part in dialogue with broadcast licensees.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 47 U.S.C. 309 and 311.
\8\ Report and Order in Docket No. 14864 at 1666.
\9\ Id. at 1667.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. A station's public file is currently composed of both items that
have to be filed with the Commission and items that are only available
in the public file at the station. The items that have to be filed with
the Commission or are otherwise available on the Commission's Web site,
and their retention periods, are:
FCC Authorizations (as required by 73.3526(e)(1),
73.3527(e)(1)) (retain until replaced);
Applications and related materials (as required by
73.3526(e)(2), 73.3527(e)(2)) (retain until final action taken on the
application); \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Applications for a new construction permit granted pursuant
to a waiver showing and applications for assignment or transfer of
license granted pursuant to a waiver showing must be retained for as
long as the waiver is in effect. In addition, license renewal
applications granted on a short-term basis must be retained until
final action has been taken on the license renewal application filed
immediately following the shortened license term. See 47 CFR
73.3526((e)(2), 73.3527(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contour Maps (as required by 73.3526(e)(4), 73.3527(e)(3))
(retain as long as they reflect current, accurate information regarding
the station);
Ownership reports and related materials (as required by
73.3526(e)(5), 73.3527(e)(4)) (retain until a new, complete ownership
report is filed with the FCC); \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See also 47 CFR 73.3613 (specifying the contracts,
instruments and documents required to be filed with the FCC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file (as
required by 73.3526(e)(7), 73.3527(e)(6)) (retain until final action
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
The Public and Broadcasting manual (as required by
73.3526(e)(8), 73.3527(e)(7)) (retain most recent version
indefinitely);
Children's television programming reports (Form 398) (as
required by 73.3526(e)(11)(iii)) (retain until final action taken on
the station's next license renewal application);
DTV transition education reports (Form 388) (as required
by 73.3526(e)(11)(iv), 73.3527(e)(13)) (retain one year after last
filed).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Stations only need to retain these quarterly reports in
their files for one year, and they must only be included through the
quarter in which the station concludes its DTV transition education
campaign. See 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(11)(iv), 73.3527(e)(13). While
almost all full-power television stations successfully transitioned
to digital technology in 2009 and no longer need to retain these
files, a few of these stations are not yet operating at full power
and continue to be required to include Form 388 in their files.
The following items are only available at the station:
Citizen agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(3)) (retain
for term of agreement);
Political file (as required by 73.3526(e)(6),
73.3527(e)(5)) (retain for two years);
Portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file (as
required by 73.3526(e)(7), 73.3527(e)(6)) (retain until final action
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
Letters and emails from the public (as required by
73.3526(e)(9)) (retain three years from receipt);
Material relating to FCC investigations and complaints (as
required by 73.3526(e)(10), 73.3527(e)(11)) (retain until notified in
writing that the material may be discarded);
Issues/Programs lists (as required by 73.3526(e)(11)(i),
73.3527(e)(8)) (retain until notified in writing that the material may
be discarded);
Donor lists for non-commercial educational channels
(``NCEs'') (as required by 73.3527(e)(9)) (retain for two years from
the date of the broadcast of the specific program reported);
Records concerning children's programming commercial
limits (as required by 73.3526(e)(11)(ii)) (retain until final action
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
Local public notice certifications and announcements (as
required by 73.3526(e)(13), 73.3527(e)(10)) (retain for as long as the
application to which it refers); \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See also 47 CFR 73.3580(h) (directing placement of
certifications and announcements into the public file).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time brokerage agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(14))
(retain for as long as contract or agreement in force);
Must-carry or retransmission consent elections (for
commercial stations) or must-carry requests (noncommercial stations)
(as required by 73.3526(e)(15), 73.3527(e)(12)) (retain for duration of
election or request period);
Joint sales agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(16))
(retain for as long as contract or agreement in force);
Class A TV continuing eligibility documentation (as
required by 73.3526(e)(17)) (retain indefinitely);
A list of chief executive officers or members of the
executive committee of an entity sponsoring or furnishing broadcast
material concerning political matter or matter involving the discussion
of controversial issues of public importance (as required by
73.1212(e)) \14\ (retain for two years).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ This rule allows for the required list to be retained
instead at the network headquarters where the broadcast is
originated by the network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. In the Report and Order the Commission required television
stations that have Internet Web sites to place their public inspection
files on their stations' Web sites and to make these files available to
the public without charge. As an alternative, the Commission determined
that stations could place their public inspection files
[[Page 72149]]
on their state broadcasters association's (``SBA'') Web site, where
permitted by the SBA to do so. Several petitioners opposed this
requirement, finding it costly and overly burdensome.
11. We continue to believe that making all station public files
available online is beneficial to the public, and necessary to provide
meaningful access to the information in the 21st century. The evolution
of the Internet and the spread of Internet access has made it easier to
post material online, made it easier for consumers to read material
online, and increased the public policy efficacy of disclosure
requirements. As the Commission noted in the Report and Order, by
making the file available through the Internet, we hope to facilitate
access to the file information and foster increased public
participation in the licensing process. The information provided in the
public file is beneficial to consumers who wish to weigh in on a
station's license renewal. We note that the Commission rarely denies
license renewal applications due to the licensee's failure to meet its
public interest programming obligation. Easy access to public file
information will also assist the Commission, Congress, and researchers
as they fashion public policy recommendations relating to broadcasting
and other media issues. Therefore, we tentatively conclude that
television broadcasters should be required to make most of the required
documents in their public inspection files available online, in lieu of
maintaining all of the documents in paper files or electronic format
available at their main studios. Currently, the public has access to
public inspection files only by visiting the main studio--which may not
be convenient--during regular business hours. Making the information
available online will provide 24-hour access from any location, without
requiring a visit to the station, thereby greatly increasing public
access to information on actions a station has taken to meet its public
interest obligation. The Internet is an effective and cost-efficient
method of maintaining contact with, and distributing information to,
broadcast viewers. We understand the concerns that broadcasters have
presented regarding the costs necessary to create and host an online
public file. We believe that technological advances in the intervening
years since this requirement was contemplated, along with changes to
the proposed requirements that are discussed below, in particular the
Commission's proposal to expend its resources and assume the burden of
hosting of the public files, will mitigate broadcasters' concerns.
Given the wide-spread availability of internet access and our goal of
limiting costs for broadcasters, we also believe that continuing to
require a complete paper public file is largely unnecessary and that
the costs of such a duplicative requirement cannot be justified.
1. Commission Hosting of Online Public File
12. Several participants in this proceeding have expressed concern
about the costs required for broadcasters to create and host their own
online public file. A few reconsideration petitioners suggested that
the Commission should instead host the public file on its Web site,
arguing that such a solution would be less burdensome to licensees, and
would also be more efficient, since many public file items are already
filed with the Commission. For instance, the Named State Broadcasters
Association argued in its petition for reconsideration that the costs
of hosting online public files should be borne by the Commission
instead of individual stations, estimating that this will save
broadcasters over $24 million in first-year costs, and almost $14
million in annual costs thereafter.
13. We tentatively agree that the paper public file requirement
should be largely eliminated, and replaced with an online public file
requirement hosted on the Commission's Web site. We believe it will be
more efficient for the public and less burdensome for broadcasters to
have all or most of their public files available in a centralized
location. Pursuant to this approach, a member of the public could enter
a station's call sign and access an electronic version of the public
file, making the Commission's Web site a one-stop shop for information
about broadcast television stations. This would be easier for the
public than searching for individual stations' Web sites, which would
have been required under the Report and Order. Because more than a
third of the required contents of the public file have to be filed with
the Commission in our Consolidated DataBase System (``CDBS'') under
current rules, we propose that we will import and update any
information that must already be filed with the Commission
electronically in CDBS to each station's public file, which will be
part of a database of all television station public files on the
Commission's Web site.\15\ This will create efficiencies for
broadcasters and centralize information for the public. Under this
mechanism, broadcasters would be responsible for uploading only those
items not otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the
Commission's Web site. We expect that in order to upload information
into its online public file, stations will need to log in, likely with
their FCC Registration Numbers. We seek comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ A successful upload of a station's public file on the
Commission's Web site would not be considered agency approval of the
material contained in the filing. As with paper public files, the
Commission staff would not review the material placed in each
station's online public file for purposes of determining compliance
with Commission rules on a routine basis. Thus, the purpose of
online hosting would simply be to provide the public with ready
access to the material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. We believe that requiring broadcasters to upload the required
items to their online public files housed on the Commission Web site
will not be unduly burdensome. With the exception of those categories
discussed below, stations will be required to upload only those types
of documents currently maintained in their public files and ensure that
the online file contains all required information. Thus, for example,
if a station does not have time brokerage agreements, joint sales
agreements, or citizen agreements, there would be nothing in these
categories for the station to upload, and the station would merely have
to indicate that the category was not applicable. Stations that do have
such agreements must only update them when the agreements change, or
remove them when the agreements expire. Stations will also be expected
to maintain their online public files actively, making sure they
contain information as required by the public file rules and removing
of items that are no longer required to be retained under our rules.
Broadcasters have raised concerns about inclusion of some of the items
listed above, such as the political file and letters and emails from
the public. We seek comment on specific issues related to those items
below.
15. We also propose that stations will need to retain electronic
copies for back-up purposes of all of the public file items to prepare
for the unlikely event that the Commission's online public file
database were to become unavailable or disabled. We do not believe that
these electronic copies should be made generally available as an
alternative to the Commission-hosted online public file. Therefore, we
propose that such electronic copies need only be available to the
Commission, and not the public, unless the online public file becomes
unavailable or disabled for any reason, in which case stations must
make their
[[Page 72150]]
copies available to the general public in whatever format they choose.
Should copies of any items in the public file be more readily
available? For instance, due to the short seven-day deadline to request
equal opportunity appearances, and the importance of candidates having
prompt access to the political file, particularly in the days leading
up to an election, should additional steps be taken to ensure that
access to the political file is maintained? Should we require that
stations make the back-up political file information available to
candidates, their representatives, and the public at their stations, in
whatever format they prefer, at least in the short term as we gain
experience with the files being hosted by the FCC? We note that
whatever requirement we ultimately adopt, stations can continue to make
the public file available locally if they choose to do so. We believe
that once all public file documents are available electronically, it
will not be burdensome to keep electronic copies at the station. We
also consider it likely that broadcasters would retain electronic
copies of such documents in the ordinary course of business. We seek
comment on this proposal, including estimates of any burden imposed by
this requirement. We also seek comment on how long such copies should
be maintained. Should copies be retained for the same length of time
that each item must be retained under our existing rules?
16. Two petitioners on reconsideration suggested that broadcasters
should be permitted to limit online public file access to viewers
within a station's geographic coverage area. We see no reason to limit
online access to the public file, and seek comment on this tentative
conclusion. As we noted in the Report and Order, we believe it entirely
consistent with Congressional intent in adopting section 309 of the Act
to embrace a public file requirement that enhances the ability of both
those within and those beyond a station's service area to participate
in the licensing process. Additionally, allowing access to people
within and outside the station's service area creates no additional
burden; indeed, limiting it to local residents would require taking
additional steps to screen those seeking access to a particular file.
In addition, limiting access to those in a geographic area would
prevent local residents from accessing the information while they are
temporarily outside the region.
17. Transition. A reconsideration petitioner proposed reducing the
burden on licensees by limiting the online public file to material
generated after any new rules become effective, thereby grandfathering
all prior paper filings. We do not agree with this proposal. Pursuant
to this approach, only items created after the adoption of the online
public file requirement would be required to be uploaded, not items
currently in the paper files. As previously stated, we believe that the
one-time electronic scanning and uploading of existing documents, both
from the current licensee and any prior licensee, would not be unduly
burdensome and that adopting a grandfathering approach would be
confusing to those seeking access to the information.\16\ Those viewing
an online public file might remain unaware of the existence of
documents in the paper public file. Moreover, such an approach would
necessitate the continued maintenance of a robust paper file,
diminishing the benefits of the online file in terms of improved public
access to information. We seek comment on this view.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ We recognize that an implementation plan needs to be
developed to enable all television stations to post their public
file documents in an orderly manner, possibly with rolling
implementation dates. The Bureau, on delegated authority, will
develop an implementation schedule and provide any necessary
guidance regarding implementation issues at the appropriate time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Accessibility. In the Report and Order, the Commission
determined that television licensees must make their Web site public
files accessible to people with disabilities. Many Petitioners asked
for clarification of this requirement. The INC Report noted that the
recently passed Twenty-First Century Communications and Video
Accessibility Act will help ensure that people with disabilities will
have access to new media. The Public Interest Public Airwaves Coalition
(``PIPAC'') has requested that the Commission require broadcasters to
ensure that the portions of their Web sites that host the public file
are accessible to people with disabilities. Because the Commission is
proposing to host all online public files, we do not believe that such
a requirement will be necessary for these purposes.\17\ We intend to
ensure that the online public files, like the rest of the Commission's
Web site, are accessible to people with disabilities. Under section 508
of the Rehabilitation Act, federal agencies must ensure that members of
the public who are disabled and who are seeking information or services
from a Federal agency ``have access to and use of information and data
that is comparable to the access to and use of the information and data
by such members of the public who are not individuals with
disabilities.'' \18\ The Commission's Web site complies with this law.
We invite comment on this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ While we do not address any Web site accessibility
requirements at this time, we encourage broadcasters to provide the
information currently available on their Web site in an accessible
manner, as well as provide information about accessible programming,
such as that with video description, as part of their efforts to
meet the public interest obligation. Station Web sites can be a
primary source of information for consumers and providing
information, particularly about accessible programming, in an
accessible manner would be beneficial to viewers.
\18\ See 29 U.S.C. 794d(1)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Application of Online Posting Rule to Specific Public File
Components
19. Political File. In the Report and Order, the Commission
excluded the political file from the Web site posting requirement,
determining that the burden of placing a station's political file
online outweighed the benefit of posting this information, which is
most heavily used by candidates and their representatives. In a
petition for reconsideration of the Report and Order, CLC et al. asked
the Commission to reconsider the exclusion, contending that the
decision focused exclusively on the interests of the candidates and
broadcasters and not the public, researchers, and public interest
organizations that also need to access the files. In response, NAB
argued that the Commission correctly determined to exempt stations'
political files from the Web site posting requirement, as this approach
is consistent with the Commission's prior exemption of political files
from the requirement that stations make copies of documents in the
public file available to persons that call the station. More recently,
PIPAC has argued that placing political file information online will
reduce the burden on broadcasters, who often receive multiple daily in-
person requests to access this information during an election season.
20. We propose that the political file should not be exempted from
the online public file requirement. We agree with CLC et al. that the
public is entitled to ready access to these important files. Since
exempting the political file in 2007, we have learned that the vast
majority of television stations handle political advertising
transactions electronically, through emails and a variety of software
applications. As a result, requiring them to make this information
publicly available online appears to impose far less of a burden than
previously thought. We emphasize, however, that the online political
file would serve as a source of information to candidates, buyers,
viewers, and others, but that the actual purchase of
[[Page 72151]]
advertising time and the receipt of equal time requests would continue
to be handled by the station. We seek comment on these proposals and
the relative burdens and benefits that broadcasters would face under
this requirement. We also seek comment about the logistics of making
this file available online. Our rules currently require that records
should be placed in the political file ``as soon as possible'' and ``as
soon as possible means immediately absent unusual circumstances.'' \19\
We tentatively conclude that stations should similarly be required to
upload the same records to their online political file ``immediately
absent unusual circumstances.'' Immediacy is necessary with respect to
the political file because a candidate has only seven days from the
date of his opponent's appearance to request equal opportunities for
that appearance. We also seek comment on methods and procedures that
can be implemented to enable the near real-time upload of political
file documents during periods of heightened activity. Can the
Commission assist in making tools available to enable such immediate
uploads and make such immediate filing as non-burdensome as possible?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See 47 CFR 73.1943(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Finally, we note that the public file rule requires licensees
to keep ``a complete and orderly'' political file. Accordingly, we
would expect licensees to upload any political file information to the
online file in an organized manner so that the political file does not
become difficult to navigate due to the sheer number of filings. For an
online political file to be useful, candidates and members of the
public must be able to easily find information that they seek. Should
the Commission create federal, state, and local subfolders for each
station's political file? Should we allow stations to create additional
subfolders within the political file? For instance, should stations be
able to create subdivisions within federal, state and local races, to
reflect individual political races? We seek comment on any other
methods of organization that would make the information more easily
accessible, and also lessen the number of questions that broadcasters
would have to field about the contents and organization of the
political file.
22. Letters From the Public. A station must currently retain in its
paper public file all letters and emails from the public regarding
operation of the station unless the letter writer has requested that
the letter not be made public or the licensee feels that it should be
excluded due to the nature of its content, such as a defamatory or
obscene letter. In the 2007 Report and Order the Commission determined
that stations would not be required to post letters from the public on
their online public files, due to the burden and cost. The Commission
did, however, require that public comments sent by email to the station
be placed in the station's online public file, as the costs of posting
correspondence already in electronic form would be less burdensome on
the station than uploading paper comments to electronic form. Several
reconsideration petitioners asked that we also exempt email from the
posting requirement, arguing that requiring their inclusion raises
privacy concerns. They asserted that posting emails from children
online may result in violations of the Children's Online Privacy
Protection Act, which prohibits posting children's personally
identifiable information online. These petitioners also argued that the
Commission oversimplified the costs of such a requirement, since
station personnel would need to review and redact all emails to strip
them of personally identifiable information before posting them. The
public interest community responded that privacy concerns could be
ameliorated through the use of warnings to posters that their
submissions would become part of the public file, and that an online
form could be used that conceals personal information. More recently,
PIPAC recommended that the Commission eliminate letters and email from
the online public file requirement. They suggest that in order to alert
members of the public to letters and emails, stations should instead be
required to disclose the total number of letters available at the
station and provide a notice that these materials are available for
public viewing at the main studio consistent with existing paper public
file rules.
23. We propose that letters and emails from the public should not
be required to be placed online. We agree that the privacy and burden
concerns discussed above are significant enough to merit their
exclusion. Letters and emails from the public that are currently
included in the public file, like the rest of the file's contents, are
already publicly available. We recognize that making this information
available online would make it much more readily accessible to the
public, but such increased accessibility may not be expected by viewers
who communicate with their stations and may actually make some viewers
less inclined to write to their stations. We seek comment on whether
the concerns discussed above justify our proposal to exempt such
communications from the online disclosure requirement. Alternatively,
should we allow or require stations to redact personally identifiable
information before posting online? While we propose that the online
public file should largely replace the paper public file, we seek
comment on PIPAC's proposal to require broadcasters to continue to
retain copies of such letters at the station for public viewing in a
paper file or an electronic database at their main studios. We envision
that such a requirement would be limited to correspondence, and would
not require any other public file information be publicly available at
the station. Would such a correspondence file requirement be limited
enough in scope to justify any additional burdens? We also seek comment
on PIPAC's proposal to require stations to report quarterly on how many
letters they have received. What would be the benefits of requiring
stations to count and report how many letters they have received? What
would be the burdens of such a requirement? Should we consider
requiring a brief description of the letter(s) received? We seek
comment on these and any other suggestions or proposals that would make
letters and emails from the public more easily accessible while at the
same time addressing privacy concerns. We also seek comment on whether
stations should have to retain comments left by the public on social
media pages, like Facebook. Should those be considered ``written
comments and suggestions received from the public regarding operation
of the station''? We tentatively conclude that such information should
not be required to be maintained in the correspondence file. We seek
comment on this tentative conclusion. We also seek comment on whether
any other contents of the public file raise similar privacy concerns,
such as donor lists that NCEs must include in the public file, as
required by 73.3527(e)(9).
24. Contour maps. Maps showing stations' service contours are
available on the Commission's Web site, and are derived from
information provided by stations in the CDBS. Stations are also
required to include contour maps in their public files; unlike the ones
available on the Commission's Web site, these include the station's
service contours and/or main studio and transmitter location. In their
petition for reconsideration of the Report and Order, the Joint
Broadcasters asked whether the availability of contour maps on the
Commission's Web site is sufficient. We believe that the contour maps
available on the Commission's Web site are
[[Page 72152]]
sufficient as they provide necessary information regarding a station's
service contours, and seek comment on this issue. We discuss requiring
information about a station's main studio in section 3 below.
25. The Public and Broadcasting manual. We propose to eliminate the
requirement that stations make available ``The Public and
Broadcasting'' manual in their public files. ``The Public and
Broadcasting'' is a consumer manual that provides an overview of the
Commission's regulation of broadcast radio and television licensees.
This manual is already available on the Commission's Web site. As we
look to centralize all public inspection files, we no longer believe it
will be necessary for every station's electronic public file to contain
this manual, nor will stations need to keep a copy at the station.
Instead, we propose to make ``The Public and Broadcasting'' prominently
available within the public file portion of the Commission's Web site
once it is created. We seek comment on this proposal.
26. Issues/programs lists. All broadcasters must currently include
in their public files issues/programs lists covering the current
license term, which are a lists of programs that have provided the
stations' most significant treatment of community issues during the
preceding quarter. In the 2007 Report and Order, we noted the
deficiencies of the issues/programs lists, and replaced the requirement
with a standardized disclosure form, subject to final OMB approval, as
discussed above. As noted above, we have vacated the 2007 Report and
Order. Although the issues/programs list required under the current
rules provides some information to the public and establishes a record
of some of a station's community-oriented programming, we continue to
believe that it suffers from several drawbacks and intend to promptly a
Notice of Inquiry to seek further input on a new standardized form. We
propose that broadcasters should be required to post to their online
public file, on a quarterly basis, their issues/programs lists required
under current rules, until the Commission replaces the issues/programs
list with a new standardized form, which we seek to address in an
expedited fashion. We seek comment on this proposal.
27. FCC investigations and complaints. Stations are required to
maintain in their public file material relating to a Commission
investigation or complaint. A petition for reconsideration of the
Report and Order suggested excluding from a station's online public
file any material that is the subject of an indecency investigation or
complaint. The petitioner argued that posting materials related to an
indecency investigation online would be inappropriate, since it is
inconsistent with the purpose of the Commission's indecency regime,
which is to protect children. They argued that because children have
easy access to an online public file, but not to a station's paper
public file, any material related to indecency investigations should be
available in a station's paper public file only. We think it is
important that material relating to indecency investigations not be
excluded from the online public file, given its relevance to the
renewal process. We do not believe that making this information
available in the public file portion of the Web site will increase the
risk to children, since the Commission already posts materials related
to indecency investigations on its Web site. We seek comment on this
proposal. We also seek comment on whether the FCC should post published
sanctions, including forfeiture orders, notices of violation, notices
of apparent liability, and citations, in a station's online public
file. If so, should licensees be required to upload their responses, if
any, to these FCC actions? We believe that this is the sort of
information that the public would want to find in reviewing a
licensee's public file, and is a natural extension of the requirement
to retain FCC correspondence. We note that parties could seek
confidential treatment of particular information in the filings, if
necessary.
3. Potential Items To Be Added to the Online Public File Requirement
28. The INC Report noted the importance of making online disclosure
a pillar of media policy and the public's need to have a more granular
understanding of how broadcasters use their stations and serve the
public. Given that we seek to modernize public disclosure requirements,
we also seek comment on adding main studio information, sponsorship
identification information, and any sharing agreements to a station's
online public file. While we seek to avoid unduly burdening
broadcasters, we do not believe that this modest expansion of the
public file will be burdensome and we believe that this information
will be useful to the public.
29. Main Studio Information. As discussed above, stations are
currently required to include contour maps in their public files, which
must include the station's service contours and/or main studio and
transmitter location. The contour maps available on the Commission's
Web site, which we propose today to fulfill the online public file
requirement, does not include main station information. Further, the
Commission does not require the reporting of a station's main studio.
We believe this information will help members of the public to engage
in an active dialogue with broadcast licensees regarding its service,
which is one of the goals of this proceeding, and will also assist in
the identification of broadcasters that are engaging in shared services
arrangements. We therefore propose that in the Commission-maintained
online public file, the station's main studio address and telephone
number be displayed. For stations with a main studio waiver, we propose
that the location of the local file and the required toll free number
should be listed. We seek comment on this proposal, as well as whether
we should require the posting of an email address that will serve as a
station contact for the public file.
30. Sponsorship Identifications. Section 317 of the Communications
Act requires that broadcasters disclose to their listeners or viewers
if a matter has been aired in exchange for money, services, or other
valuable consideration. The Commission's sponsorship identification
rules currently require that stations provide an on-air disclosure when
content is paid for, furnished, or sponsored by an outside party. The
INC Report discussed examples of ``pay-for-play'' arrangements at local
TV stations, where ``advertisers have been allowed to dictate, shape or
sculpt news or editorial content.'' The INC Report expressed concern
that this practice could have negative implications for the community's
trust in local TV. The INC Report recommended that the Commission
require that the on-air disclosures for such ``pay-for-play''
arrangements, which are already required to be disclosed on-air, be
available online, perhaps as part of the public file, in order to
create a permanent, searchable record of which stations use these
arrangements and to afford easy access by consumers and watchdog groups
to this information. PIPAC has recently recommended that, when a
broadcaster airs news or information programming that would require an
on-air disclosure of a sponsor under the FCC sponsorship identification
rules, the licensee should also post that information in its online
public file.
31. With the exception of sponsored political advertising and
certain issue advertising, the Commission only requires that the
sponsorship identification announcement occur once
[[Page 72153]]
during the programming and remain on the screen long enough to be read
or heard by an average viewer.\20\ Section 317 requires stations to
announce sponsorship information during the programming, and the
implementing rule has long had an additional public file recordkeeping
component for political and controversial issue announcements.\21\ The
Commission has explained that such recordkeeping furthers the rule's
underlying purpose. Given the fleeting nature of all disclosures, we
believe it would also be useful to include such on-air disclosures in
television broadcasters' online public file obligations, by requiring
stations to list such sponsors in their online public file. Requiring a
list of sponsors will create an accessible record of such sponsorships,
and will allow interested parties to keep track of the number and
extent of such sponsorships. We believe that such a list will further a
central principle of the rule, which is that ``listeners are entitled
to know by whom they are being persuaded.'' We seek comment on this
proposal, and on our authority to impose such a requirement. We also
seek input on how burdensome this requirement would be for
broadcasters. This information must already be collected and disclosed
on the air. What additional burden would be involved in listing the
sponsors of such disclosures in the online public file? While the INC
Report only suggests the online disclosure of sponsorship
identification of news programming, we do not propose to limit
disclosure to certain types of programming, but to include all
sponsorships that require a special on-air disclosure. However,
sponsorship identification announcements which are exempted under
current rules, such as in situations involving commercial product
advertisements where it's clear that the product is a sponsorship, will
not need to be included in the online disclosures. We are only
proposing to make disclosures currently required by section 317 and our
rules more accessible. We seek comment on this proposal, including how
long broadcasters should be required to retain this information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Political broadcast matter or any broadcast matter
involving the discussion of a controversial issue of public
importance longer than five minutes ``for which any film, record,
transcription, talent, script, or other material or service of any
kind is furnished * * * to a station as inducement for the
broadcasting of such matter'' requires a sponsorship identification
announcement both at the beginning and the conclusion of the
broadcast programming containing the announcement. 47 CFR
73.1212(d).
\21\ 47 U.S.C. 317(a)(1); 47 CFR 73.1212(e). See also KGVO
Broadcasting Inc., 9 FCC Rcd 6396 (1994). Section 315(e) of the Act
includes a similar requirement to place a list of executives of a
sponsoring entity in the political file for certain political
matter. 47 U.S.C. 315(e)(2)(G). This matter includes, among other
things, a national legislative issue of public importance. See 47
U.S.C. 315(e)(1)(B)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. Sharing Agreements. PIPAC has recently recommended that sharing
agreements among licensees, such as local news sharing and shared
services agreements, should be available in the public file. Sharing
agreements are contracts between licensees where one licensee provides
certain station-related services to another station, including
administrative, sales, and/or programming support, in order to obtain
certain efficiencies.\22\ PIPAC notes that the INC Report found that
some stations are outsourcing their news production or engaging in
other forms of cooperative newsgathering. PIPAC argues that unless such
agreements are available online it will be extremely difficult for
members of the public, or the Commission, to learn about such
agreements, which affect control of the station and production of local
news and other programming. We note that the Commission already
requires the disclosure of certain sharing agreements, such as time
brokerage and joint sales agreements. We seek comment on whether
disclosure of these similar agreements would serve the public interest,
and whether stations should be required to disclose such items in their
online public file. We seek comment on whether such agreements should
be subject to the same redaction allowances that are made available to
joint sales agreements and time brokerage agreements. We also seek
comments on the burdens of adopting such a requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Some sharing agreements can affect at the Commission's
attribution rules, which define what interests are counted for
purposes of applying the Commission's broadcast ownership rules. See
generally 47 CFR 73.3555.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Format
33. The INC Report finds that information ``needs to be put out in
standardized, machine-readable, structured formats that make it easy
for programmers to create new applications that can present the data in
more useful formats, or combine one agency's information with
another,'' and that ``data releases should include an Application
Programming Interface (API) that allows the data to be shared easily
with other computers and applications.'' With respect to broadcasters'
public files in particular, the INC Report states that ``[o]nline
disclosure should be done according to the principles advocated by
experts on transparency: in standardized, machine readable and
structured formats.''
34. We agree that some of the information in the public file would
be of much greater benefit to the public if made available in a
structured or database-friendly format that can be aggregated,
manipulated, and more easily analyzed. That is our ultimate goal. We
recognize, however, that converting the files to this format will take
time and money. We tentatively conclude that we should not delay the
benefits of having the public file available online, and therefore
propose to not require broadcasters to alter the form of documents
already in existence prior to posting them to the online public file at
this time. However, we seek comment here on issues we should consider
in the implementation of such an advanced database. Would the
investment and effort to establish a searchable database yield
improvement from simply having the broadcasters post the documents
online in their current format? What steps would need to be taken in
order to ensure the uploading of searchable documents by the
broadcasters could be accomplished in a non-burdensome way? We believe
that further consideration of the issue may lead to creation of more
useful tools to analyze the information produced in the online public
file. We seek comment, however, on whether broadcasters should be
required to upload any electronic documents in their existing format to
the extent feasible. For example, to the extent that a required filing
already exists in a searchable format--such as Microsoft Word ``.doc''
format or non-copy protect text-searchable ``pdf'' format for text
filings, or ``native formats'' such as spreadsheets in Microsoft
``.xml'' format for non-text filings--should broadcasters be expected
to upload the filing in that format to the extent technically feasible?
We believe that requiring broadcasters to do so could increase
usability and facilitate text searches. Should we require that
documents created after the effective date of rules adopted in this
proceeding be posted in a searchable format? Would such a requirement
be unduly burdensome? To the extent documents are filed in a non-
searchable format, should the Commission digitize the documents and
perform optical character recognition (``OCR'')? Given that native and
primary electronic formats are more reliable than OCR, we believe that
it will be in every station's best interests to provide documents in
native and primary electronic formats to the extent feasible.
[[Page 72154]]
35. We also seek comment on what metadata should be made available
in the online public file. Should users be able to access when each
item was uploaded to the file? Should we also make available metadata
about who uploaded the item? Are there concerns about metadata
disclosures for confidential or privileged information? If so, what
steps should the Commission and stations take to manage these concerns?
B. Announcements and Links
36. In the 2007 Report and Order, the Commission determined that
viewers should be notified of the existence, location, and
accessibility of the station's public file, as this would increase
viewer awareness and help promote the ongoing dialogue between a
station and the viewers it is licensed to serve. Therefore, the
Commission required that licensees provide such notice on-air twice
daily during the regular station identification announcements required
under our rules, with at least one announcement to be aired between 6
p.m. and midnight. Reconsideration petitioners argued that twice daily
announcements were excessive. Public television stations argued that
television station identifications are very limited in length, and that
the Report and Order did not provide a reason for changing course from
the tentative conclusion made in the NPRM that the Commission should
not require announcements. They proposed that the Commission reduce
this requirement to a few times a week, at most.
37. We continue to believe that viewers should be notified of the
existence, location, and accessibility of the station's public file; if
most viewers are unaware of the existence of the public file or how to
access it, its usefulness will be greatly diminished. We seek comment
on how best to achieve this goal. Would requiring on-air announcements
a few times a week be sufficient? Should we dictate day part
requirements for certain announcements to be sure a large number of
viewers are reached? We propose that stations be required to announce
the existence, location, and accessibility of the station's public file
three times a week as part of the station identification. We also
propose that the notice state that the station's public file is
available for inspection and that consumers can view it at the
Commission's Web site, and that at least one of the announcements must
occur between the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight. We seek comment on
these proposals.
38. PIPAC proposes that a link to the online public file appear on
a broadcaster's home page, along with contact information for people
with disabilities to use if they have concerns. They note that for a
person with disabilities already struggling with an inaccessible site,
the burden of searching through several pages or levels becomes an
insurmountable barrier. We tentatively agree that stations that have
Web sites should be required to place a link to the public file on
their home page, not just to assist the disabled community, but to
assist all members of the public who are looking for more information
about a licensee. We seek comment on PIPAC's proposal that stations
also list on their home page contact information for people with
disabilities. What types of contact information would be most useful?
C. Radio
39. Given this proceeding's genesis in the DTV transition, the
Report and Order was limited to television stations. The Commission
later sought comment on implementing an online public file requirement
for analog and digital radio stations in the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in the Digital Audio Broadcasting proceeding.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems and Their Impact on
the Terrestrial Radio Broadcast Service, Second Report and Order,
First Order on Reconsideration and Second Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 10344, 10391 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
40. This FNPRM, like all other items in this docket, is directed
toward television broadcasters. We may consider requiring radio
licensees to abide by similar reforms to their public file requirements
at a later date. We believe, however, that there are benefits to
requiring television licensees to implement enhanced disclosure
requirements first. Television stations have been significantly more
involved in considering these issues, from the NOI in 1999 through the
2007 Report and Order. Further, it may ease the initial implementation
of a Commission-hosted online public file if we begin the process with
the much smaller number of television licensees than with all
broadcasters. Finally, we foresee that there may be some radio-specific
concerns that we will need to address prior to implementing an online
public file requirement on radio stations. We thus tentatively conclude
not to include radio licensees in this proceeding.
IV. Cost/Benefit Analysis
41. In proposing rules to ensure that the public has adequate
access to information about how broadcasters are serving their
communities, we intend to look at the many factors involved in
effective enhanced disclosure. This will ensure that the rules serve
their intended purpose without posing an undue burden on industry.
There are two key criteria for the success of such an approach.
42. First, acknowledging the potential difficulty of quantifying
benefits and burdens, we need to determine whether the proposed
disclosure rules will significantly benefit the public. Second, we seek
to maximize the benefits to the public from our proposed rules while
taking into consideration the burden of compliance on broadcasters.
These costs and benefits can have many dimensions, including cost
implications for industry, public interest benefits to viewers, and
other less tangible benefits.
43. To address the first criterion, we seek comment on the best
ways to ensure that the forms of disclosure discussed in this FNPRM
will actually benefit the public. While most of the information to be
included in the online public file is largely the same as information
already being provided in the paper file, we seek comment on the value
and use of the potential items to be added to the online public file,
as discussed above. Further, we seek comment on any considerations
regarding the manner in which our proposals could be implemented that
would increase the number of people who will benefit from such rules,
and the nature of these benefits. In particular, we seek comment on the
best ways to ensure that information is more readily accessible to the
public. While we believe that the proposed rules will increase its
accessibility, by replacing the paper version of the public file with
an online version, we seek further suggestions for increasing
accessibility.
44. To address the second criterion, we seek comment on the nature
and magnitude of the costs and benefits of our new streamlined
proposals. We recognize that these may vary by broadcaster, and seek
comment on possible differential impacts, including size and type of
broadcaster. We seek specific information about whether, how, and by
how much broadcasters may be impacted differently in terms of the costs
and benefits of our proposed rules. We also seek comment on the most
cost-effective approach for modifying existing policies and practices
to achieve the goals of this proceeding.
45. To the extent possible, we request comment that will enable us
to balance the positive benefits of these proposed disclosure rules
with the costs that they may impose on broadcasters. We
[[Page 72155]]
recognize that costs and benefits will vary depending on the specific
documents and format we require broadcasters to submit for inclusion in
an online public file to be hosted by the Commission. A rule that
documents may be uploaded in any format will likely impose minimal
burdens on broadcasters as compared to a requirement that only
documents in standardized formats will be accepted, as at least some
broadcasters may need to recreate or reformat their documents prior to
submission. The benefit the public reaps from access to information
about how broadcasters are serving their communities will similarly
vary depending on the specific documents and formats we require
broadcasters to submit. Information that is submitted in non-
standardized formats will be useful to members of the public who are
interested in only one or a few television stations. Researchers,
however, need access to standardized data that are aggregable and
searchable in order for the data to be useful in their analyses of
industry performance. We request that commenters provide specific data
and information, such as actual or estimated dollar figures for each
specific cost or benefit addressed, including a description of how the
data or information was calculated or obtained and any supporting
documentation or other evidentiary support. All comments will be
considered and given appropriate weight. Vague or unsupported
assertions regarding costs or benefits generally can be expected to
receive less weight and be less persuasive than more specific and
supported statements.
A. Online Public File
46. While it may be difficult to quantify the benefits of an online
public file requirement, we seek comment on ways to do so. Is there a
way to quantify the value of improving the quality of information
presented to consumers? We also seek comment on the costs, which should
be much more quantifiable. We received cost data from the commenters
and petitioners in response to the NPRM and discussed them in the
Report and Order. Given the technological advances since these
estimates were created, the fact that the Commission is contemplating
becoming the host of the online public file requirement, and that we
are proposing to modify the required materials to be posted to the
file, we seek updated cost estimates. Because most of the items that we
are seeking to include in the online public file are already available
in an electronic format, and because we are proposing to largely
eliminate the paper public file, we believe that the costs of uploading
these files to the online public file will be less burdensome than
originally anticipated.
47. We seek to weigh the costs of an online public file requirement
against the benefits to the public of Internet accessibility of the
information. It is beneficial for the community to have Internet access
to information it may not otherwise be able to obtain. Making
information available in the online public file will educate consumers
on issues that they might not otherwise know about, absent an ability
to visit a station to inspect the public file, and will assist
consumers in educating themselves about the licensee and its
programming. Making this information readily accessible will also
assist the Commission and Congress in formulating public policy about
broadcasting and other media issues. As discussed in previous Orders,
the Commission has found that each of the items required to be placed
in the public file is important, and needs to be accessible to the
public. Internet access to such information improves public access and
reduces some burdens on broadcasters. As discussed throughout the
FNPRM, we seek comment on further ways to relieve burdens on
broadcasters in creating the online public file requirement. Should we
consider creating different requirements for small television
broadcasters?
B. Announcements
48. Finally, we seek to quantify the costs and benefits associated
with notifying the public of the existence, location, and accessibility
of the station's public file. The benefits of such a requirement,
increasing viewer awareness and helping promote the ongoing dialogue
between a station and the viewers they are licensed to serve, are
difficult to quantify, but we seek comment on how to do so. We also
seek comment on the projected costs of such announcements. Would
requiring three announcements a week be a justifiable burden on
broadcasters? Is the amount of the burden affected by the time of day
that the announcement is made?
V. Procedural Matters
A. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
49. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (``RFA''), the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') concerning the possible
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules
proposed in the FNRPM Written public comments are requested on this
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be
filed by the deadlines for comments. The Commission will send a copy of
the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration (``SBA''). In addition, the FNPRM and
IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rule Changes
50. One of a television broadcaster's fundamental public interest
obligations is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests
of its community of license. Broadcasters are afforded considerable
flexibility in how they meet that obligation. Among other things, they
are required to maintain a public inspection file, which gives the
public access to information about the station's operations. The FNPRM
seeks to make information regarding how a television broadcast station
serves the public interest easier to understand and more accessible.
51. The FNPRM seeks comment on rule changes that would:
Replace the requirement that television stations maintain
a paper public file at their main studios with a requirement to submit
documents for inclusion in an online public file, including the
political file, to be hosted by the Commission;
Reduce the number of documents that television stations
would be required to upload to an online public file, by automatically
linking to information already collected by the Commission;
Streamline the information required to be kept in the
file, such as by excluding letters and emails from the public;
Require that sponsorship identification, now disclosed
only on-air, should also be disclosed online, and require disclosure of
online shared services agreements; and
Make the online public file standardized and searchable,
further improving the usefulness of the data.
2. Legal Basis
52. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2,
4(i), 303, and 405 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152,
154(i), 303, and 405.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
53. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by
[[Page 72156]]
the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA. Below, we
provide a description of such small entities, as well as an estimate of
the number of such small entities, where feasible.
54. Television Broadcasting. The SBA defines a television
broadcasting station as a small business if such station has no more
than $14.0 million in annual receipts. Business concerns included in
this industry are those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting images
together with sound.'' \24\ The Commission has estimated the number of
licensed commercial television stations to be 1,390. According to
Commission staff review of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro
Television Database (BIA) as of January 31, 2011, 1,006 (or about 78
percent) of an estimated 1,298 commercial television stations in the
United States have revenues of $14 million or less and, thus, qualify
as small entities under the SBA definition. The Commission has
estimated the number of licensed noncommercial educational (``NCE'')
television stations to be 391. We note, however, that, in assessing
whether a business concern qualifies as small under the above
definition, business (control) affiliations must be included. Our
estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of small entities
that might be affected by our action, because the revenue figure on
which it is based does not include or aggregate revenues from
affiliated companies. The Commission does not compile and otherwise
does not have access to information on the revenue of NCE stations that
would permit it to determine how many such stations would qualify as
small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id. This category description continues, ``These
establishments operate television broadcasting studios and
facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the
public. These establishments also produce or transmit visual
programming to affiliated broadcast television stations, which in
turn broadcast the programs to the public on a predetermined
schedule. Programming may originate in their own studios, from an
affiliated network, or from external sources.'' Separate census
categories pertain to businesses primarily engaged in producing
programming. See Motion Picture and Video Production, NAICS code
512110; Motion Picture and Video Distribution, NAICS Code 512120;
Teleproduction and Other Post-Production Services, NAICS Code
512191; and Other Motion Picture and Video Industries, NAICS Code
512199.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
55. In addition, an element of the definition of ``small business''
is that the entity not be dominant in its field of operation. We are
unable at this time to define or quantify the criteria that would
establish whether a specific television station is dominant in its
field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses to
which rules may apply do not exclude any television station from the
definition of a small business on this basis and are therefore over-
inclusive to that extent. Also, as noted, an additional element of the
definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must be
independently owned and operated. We note that it is difficult at times
to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and our
estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive
to this extent.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements
56. Certain rule changes proposed in the FNPRM would affect
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. Television
broadcasters are currently required to maintain a copy of their public
inspection files at their main studios. The FNPRM proposes to replace
that requirement with a requirement to submit documents for inclusion
in an online public file, including the political file, to be hosted on
the Commission's Web site. Items in the public file that must also be
filed with the Commission, including FCC authorizations, applications
and related materials, contour maps, ownership reports and related
materials, portions of the equal employment opportunity file, the
public and broadcasting manual, children's television programming
reports (Form 398), and DTV transition education reports (Form 388),
will be automatically imported into the station's online public file.
Television stations will only be responsible for uploading and
maintaining items that are not required to be filed with the Commission
under any other rule. The FNPRM also proposes to exclude some items
from the online public file requirement, such as letters and emails
from the public, and proposes to add other items to the online public
file requirement, such as whether sponsorship identification, now
disclosed only on-air, should also be disclosed online, and whether to
require disclosure of online shared services agreements.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
57. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.
58. The FNPRM seeks to minimize reporting requirements on all
television broadcasters, by having the Commission host the online
public file. The previous Report and Order in this proceeding, which
has been vacated, required stations to host their own public file.
Having the Commission host the public file will ease the administrative
burdens on all broadcasters. More than a third of the required contents
of the public file have to be filed with the Commission, and the FNPRM
proposes to import and update information that must already be filed
with the Commission automatically, creating efficiencies for
broadcasters. Accordingly, since no significant economic impact is
imposed by the proposed rules on small entities, no discussion of
alternatives is warranted.
59. Overall, in proposing rules governing an online public file
requirement, we believe that we have appropriately balanced the
interests of the public against the interests of the entities who will
be subject to the rules, including those that are smaller entities.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rule
60. None.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
61. This document contains proposed information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we seek specific comment on how we
[[Page 72157]]
might ``further reduce the information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
C. Ex Parte Rules
62. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding will be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding subject to the Commission's ex parte
rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any
written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation
within two business days after the presentation (unless a different
deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making
oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise
participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was
made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during
the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of
the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the
presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the
proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings
(specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data
or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of
electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto,
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available
for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g.,
.doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding
should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
D. Filing Requirements
63. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of
the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this
document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic
Comment Filing System (``ECFS'').
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one of each filing. If more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service
mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary,
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
[cir] All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for
the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are
8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber
bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering
the building.
[cir] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
[cir] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail
must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington DC 20554.
64. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex
parte submissions will be available for public inspection during
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington,
DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents
will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe
Acrobat.
65. Accessibility Information. To request information in accessible
formats (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an
email to [email protected] or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
66. Additional Information. For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Holly Saurer of the Media Bureau, Policy Division,
(202) 418-7283, or via email at [email protected].
VI. Ordering Clauses
67. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority
contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, and 307 of the Communications
Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, and 307, this Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
68. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 73
Television.
Federal Communications Commission
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 part 73 as follows:
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
1. The Authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 and 339.
2. Section 73.1201 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read
as follows:
Sec. 73.1201 Station identification.
* * * * *
(b)
* * * * *
(3) Three times a week, the station identification for television
stations must include a notice stating that the station's public file
is available for viewing at the FCC's Web site. At least one of the
announcements must occur between the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight.
3. Section 73.1212 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.1212 Sponsorship Identification; list retention; related
requirements.
* * * * *
(e) The announcement required by this section shall, in addition to
stating the fact that the broadcast matter was sponsored, paid for or
furnished, fully and fairly disclose the true identity of the person or
persons, or corporation, committee, association or other unincorporated
group, or other entity by whom or on whose behalf such payment is made
or promised, or from whom or on whose behalf such services or other
valuable consideration is received, or by whom the material or services
referred
[[Page 72158]]
to in paragraph (d) of this section are furnished. Where an agent or
other person or entity contracts or otherwise makes arrangements with a
station on behalf of another, and such fact is known or by the exercise
of reasonable diligence, as specified in paragraph (b) of this section,
could be known to the station, the announcement shall disclose the
identity of the person or persons or entity on whose behalf such agent
is acting instead of the name of such agent. Where the material
broadcast is political matter or matter involving the discussion of a
controversial issue of public importance and a corporation, committee,
association or other unincorporated group, or other entity is paying
for or furnishing the broadcast matter, the station shall, in addition
to making the announcement required by this section, require that a
list of the chief executive officers or members of the executive
committee or of the board of directors of the corporation, committee,
association or other unincorporated group, or other entity shall be
made available for public inspection at the location specified under
Sec. 73.3526. If the broadcast is originated by a network, the list
may, instead, be retained at the headquarters office of the network or
at the location where the originating station maintains its public
inspection file under Sec. 73.3526. Such lists shall be kept and made
available for a period of two years.
* * * * *
4. Section 73.1943 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.1943 Political file.
* * * * *
(d) Location of the file. A television station licensee or
applicant must also place all of the contents of its political file on
the Commission's Web site. This electronic political file must be
updated in the same manner as paragraph (c) of this section.
5. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding
paragraphs (e)(18) and (e)(19) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commercial stations.
* * * * *
(b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be
located as follows:
(1) For radio licensees, a hard copy of the public inspection file
shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. For television
licensees, letters and emails from the public, as required by paragraph
(e)(9) of this section, shall be maintained at the main studio of the
station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall
maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of
license or at its proposed main studio.
(2) A television station licensee or applicant shall place the
contents of its public inspection file required by paragraph (e) of
this section on the Commission's Web site, with the exception of
letters and emails from the public as required by paragraph (e)(9) of
this section, which will be retained at the station in the manner
discussed in paragraph (1) of this section. A station must link to the
public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the
home page of its own Web site, if the station has a Web site.
(3) The Commission will automatically link the following items to
the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection
files, to the extent that the Commission has these items
electronically: Authorizations, applications, contour maps; ownership
reports and related materials; portions of the Equal Employment
Opportunity file held by the Commission; the public and broadcasting;
Children's television programming reports; and DTV transition education
reports. In the event that the online public file does not reflect such
required information, the licensee will be responsible for posting such
material.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(18) Sharing agreements. For commercial television stations, a copy
of every agreement or contract involving sharing agreements for the
station, including local news sharing agreements and shared services
agreements, whether the agreement involves stations in the same markets
or in differing markets, with confidential or proprietary information
redacted where appropriate.
(19) Sponsorship identifications. For commercial television
stations, a list of all sponsorship identifications that must be
announced on-air pursuant to 47 CFR 73.1212.
* * * * *
6. Section 73.3527 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.3527 Local public inspection file of noncommercial
educational stations.
* * * * *
(b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be
located as follows:
(1) For radio licensees, a hard copy of the public inspection file
shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. For television
licensees, letters and emails from the public, as required by paragraph
(e)(9) of this section, shall be maintained at the main studio of the
station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall
maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of
license or at its proposed main studio.
(2) A television station licensee or applicant shall place the
contents of its public inspection file on the Commission's Web site,
with the exception of letters and emails from the public, which will be
retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (1) of
this section. A station must link to the public inspection file hosted
on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if
the station has a Web site.
(3) The Commission will automatically link the following items to
the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection
files, to the extent that the Commission has these items
electronically: Contour maps; ownership reports and related materials;
portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file held by the
Commission; and the public and broadcasting.
[FR Doc. 2011-30009 Filed 11-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P