Broadcast Services; Children's Television

[[Page 20586]]

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 93-48; FCC 95-143]

Broadcast Services; Children's Television

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice proposes a number of changes to the Commission's

rules regarding the broadcast of television programming that serves the

educational and information needs of children, in order to implement

the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA) more effectively. First,

the Commission proposes to require broadcasters to identify, on the air

and in materials provided to publishers of broadcast schedules,

programming ``specifically designed'' to educate and inform children.

The Commission also seeks comment on ways to improve the quality of,

and public access to, the information broadcasters make available

regarding their efforts in providing children's educational and

informational programming. Second, the Commission proposes to clarify

its definition of ``educational and informational programming'' by

adopting a definition of ``core'' programming. The Commission also

seeks comment on which of three alternative options for further action

should be implemented:

Commission monitoring of the amount of educational and

informational programming on the air during a specified period

following adoption of measures to improve the flow of programming

information to the public and a clarified definition; adoption of a

safe harbor processing guideline specifying an amount of core

programming that would satisfy the CTA; and adoption of a programming

standard requiring that every station be responsible for the airing of

a minimum amount of core programming in its market. The Commission also

invites comment on possible new license renewal procedures and program

sponsorship rules allowing licensees the option of meeting their

programming obligation under the CTA in part by sponsoring core

programming on other stations in their market. This action is taken to

ensure that the educational and informational needs of children are

satisfied and thus that broadcasters comply with the CTA.

DATES: Comments are due by June 16, 1995, and reply comments are due by

July 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Conley, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

776-1653.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's

Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in MM Docket No. 93-48, FCC 95-

143, adopted April 5, 1995, and released April 7, 1995. The complete

text of this NPRM is available for inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's

copy contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800,

2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rule Making

1. Through this NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on several

proposals aimed at providing licensees with clear, simple, and fair

guidance regarding their children's programming obligation, to

facilitate compliance with the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA

or Act). The CTA was enacted to ``increase the amount of educational

and informational broadcast television programming for children.''\1\

In response to this mandate, the Commission earlier adopted a Report

and Order in MM Dockets 90-570 and 83-670 (56 FR 19611, April 29, 1991)

and a Memorandum Opinion and Order in the same proceeding (56 FR 42707,

August 29, 1991), establishing rules which implemented the CTA.

\1\Children's Television Act of 1989, Senate Committee on

Commerce, Science, and Transportation, S. Rep. No. 227, 101st Cong.,

1st Sess. 1, 9 (1989) (``Senate Report'').

The other provisions of the CTA, those intended to protect

children from over commercialization of programming, are not at

issue in this proceeding.

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

2. The CTA imposes an affirmative obligation on broadcast

television stations to serve the educational and informational needs of

children through not only their ``overall programming,'' but also

programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's needs. The

Act requires the Commission, in evaluating its licensees' license

renewal applications, to determine whether stations have met this

obligation. The CTA also authorizes the Commission, as part of its

license renewal review process, to consider any special nonbroadcast

efforts by the licensee that enhance the educational and information

value of programming to children, and any special efforts by the

licensee to produce or support programming specifically designed to

serve the educational and informational needs of children that is

broadcast by another station in the licensee's market. Our current

rules generally incorporate the language of the statute and also define

educational and informational programming as ``programming that

furthers the positive development of children 16 years of age and under

in any respect, including the child's intellectual/cognitive or social/

emotional needs.''\2\ In addition, we require broadcasters to air some

amount of standard-length educational and informational programming

specifically designed for children 16 years of age and under. The

Commission has adopted no other guidelines regarding the types of

programming that may contribute to satisfying a station's renewal

review requirement, and our rules contain no requirement as to the

number of hours of educational and informational programming that

stations must broadcast or the time of day during which such

programming may be aired.

\2\47 C.F.R. 73.671 Note.

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

3. After developing some experience with the CTA, including the

review of more than 320 television license renewals, the Commission

issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) initiating this proceeding (58 FR

14367, March 17, 1993) to examine whether its children's television

rules should be revised. After careful consideration of the studies,

comments, and other information regarding the availability of

educational broadcast programming provided in response to the NOI and

in connection with the FCC's en banc hearing on children's television

held on June 28, 1994 (59 FR 22814, May 3, 1994), the Commission finds

that this evidence is insufficient to support a conclusion as to

whether or not the educational and informational needs of children are

being met, including whether the CTA and our existing regulations have

precipitated a significant increase in the amount of children's

educational and informational programming carried by commercial

broadcasters. In particular, none of the studies submitted enables us

to determine accurately what amount of programming specifically

designed to educate and inform children is currently being aired by

commercial stations.

4. Even if the Commission accepts the conclusion drawn by some

parties that the amount of educational programming on the air has

increased since implementation of our rules, the degree of that

increase appears to be quite [[Page 20587]] modest at best. Thus, the

Commission is not convinced that the current rules are prompting an

adequate response to the CTA. Accordingly, the Commission feels that it

would be desirable to precipitate a more substantial and significant

increase in the amount of children's educational and informational

programming--in particular, programming specifically designed to

educate and inform children--in the future.

5. In developing the rule revisions it proposes, the Commission has

followed three principles. The first principle is that judgments of the

quality of a licensee's programming, educational or otherwise, are best

made by the audience, not by the federal government. It should not be

necessary for the Commission to make such judgments if the public has

sufficient programming information to play an active role in ensuring

that the goals of the CTA are met. The provision of better programing

information to the public should give parents and others the

opportunity to influence broadcasters to air more educational

programming--by, for example, encouraging children to watch educational

programming and thereby increasing the ratings for such programming--

and should also facilitate enforcement of the CTA.

6. To improve the flow of information to the public, the Commission

proposes to require broadcasters to identify programs as educational at

the time they are aired and in materials provided to publishers of

television schedules. Such identifications need not take up large

amounts of air time or print and could be as simple as an icon.

Commenters are asked not only to discuss this specific proposal, but

also to propose any additional methods for informing the public of

upcoming children's programming. Comment is also sought on how to

improve the quality of, and public access to, the information provided

by stations regarding their efforts to provide programming specifically

designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children.

The Commission seeks comment on revising our existing rule requiring

broadcasters to place in their public inspection files annual or

quarterly reports about the children's programming they air. One

suggested change is to require broadcasters to include in these reports

the name of and method for contacting the person at the station

responsible for collecting comments on the station's compliance with

the CTA. The Commission further seeks comment on ways of rendering the

required information in an easily understandable yet comprehensive

form, and whether these reports should be required annually or

quarterly or whether stations should continue to be allowed to choose

between the two options.

7. The second principle the Commission has followed is that our

rules and processes should be as clear, simple, and fair as possible.

To this end, the Commission proposes to revise our definition of

``educational and informational'' programming. The current definition--

``programming that furthers the positive development of children 16

years of age and under in any respect, including the child's

intellectual/cognitive or social/emotional needs''--is ambiguous and

fails to give licensees clear guidance. Indeed, some licensees have

interpreted this definition to include general audience news and game

shows. Moreover, the Commission has never defined what constitutes

programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational

and informational needs, even though the CTA expressly requires each

licensee to provide such programming. The Commission is concerned that

this lack of clarity has led to less than optimal compliance with the

goals of the CTA and that, unless greater specificity is provided,

noneducational programming could drive educational programming off the

air. The Commission therefore proposes to adopt a definition of

programming specifically designed to serve children's educational and

informational needs, i.e., ``core'' programming.

8. The Commission tentatively concludes that we should define

``core'' educational programming as those programs that meet the

following requirements: (1) The program is specifically designed to

meet the educational and informational needs of children ages 16 and

under (i.e., has education as a significant purpose); (2) the

educational objective of the program and the target child audience are

specified in writing in the children's programming report described

above; (3) the program is aired between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and

11:00 p.m.; (4) the program is regularly scheduled; (5) the program is

of a substantial length (e.g., 15 or 30 minutes); and (6) the program

is identified as educational children's programming at the time it is

aired, and instructions for listing it as educational programming are

provided by the licensee to program guides. The Commission seeks

comment on this definition.

9. The Commission's third principle is that broadcasters should be

guided by market forces, to the greatest extent possible, in

determining whether they meet their programming obligation by airing

shows themselves, or by sponsoring programming aired on other stations.

The program sponsorship concept, most relevant to the options discussed

below of adopting processing guidelines or programming standards, would

permit a broadcaster to better utilize other stations' children's

programming expertise, would allow some stations to develop audience

identification and programming schedules that build child audiences,

and could stimulate growth in the production of educational and

informational programming, all while reducing disincentives to airing

such programming.

10. While the Commission believes that the proposals to ensure that

the public has greater access to information and to clarify the

definition of educational and informational programming are important

steps toward promoting the goals of the CTA more effectively, the

Commission is concerned that these efforts may not suffice to serve the

educational and informational needs of children, and to bring about the

kind of measurable increase in such programming contemplated by

Congress. Accordingly, the Commission also proposes to take one of the

following three types of action.

11. The first option available to the Commission would be to

monitor the amount of broadcasted programming specifically designed to

serve the educational and informational needs of children for a

specified period of time (e.g., three years) to determine whether the

Commission's efforts to increase the flow of information to the public

and clarify our rules have caused a significant increase in such

programming. Stations would be required to submit annual descriptions

of their educational and informational programming. At the end of the

specified period, the Commission would assess the need for further

regulatory action.

12. A second option would be to establish a safe harbor

quantitative processing guideline. Such a guideline would specify an

amount of core programming that would represent one means of satisfying

the CTA's programming obligation and permit staff approval of the

children's programming portion of a license renewal application. Under

this option, if a licensee aired the prescribed amount of programming,

its license renewal application would not be reviewed further for CTA

programming compliance. The only challenges to a licensee's children's

[[Page 20588]] programming performance that would be entertained would

be those questioning the bona fides of a licensee's claim to have met

the processing guideline. A licensee that did not meet the processing

guideline would have its application referred to the Commission for

consideration and would have the opportunity to demonstrate that it had

complied with the CTA in other ways. The Commission would then evaluate

such a licensee's performance based on its overall efforts and other

circumstances. Failure to meet the guideline would thus result in

greater review of the application, but would not constitute a de facto

violation of the Commission's rules.

13. Given the results of the studies submitted in the record thus

far, and allowing for the possibility that these studies may be

somewhat flawed, the Commission is currently inclined to think that, if

a processing guideline is adopted, it should be set at 3 hours per week

of core programming, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment

on this suggestion and on whether, if a processing guideline is

adopted, it should be increased in stages over time. If the Commission

adopts a phased-in processing guideline, what should the ultimate level

of the guideline be, and over what period of time should it be phased

in? One possibility would be to increase the guideline by increments of

the half hour each year until reaching a level of 5 hours of core

programming per week.

14. A third option would be to establish a standard requiring that

every station be responsible for the airing of a minimum amount of core

programming in its market. Stations meeting this requirement would

qualify for staff approval of the children's programming portion of

their license renewal application. Those not meeting the standard would

have their applications referred to the Commission for determination of

the appropriate remedy. Notwithstanding failure to meet the standard,

the Commission could hold that the licensee had in fact complied with

the CTA's requirements. However, a licensee failing to meet a standard

would have a much heavier burden to show that it complied with the CTA

than would be the case if it did not meet a processing guideline. Thus,

a licensee failing to meet a standard would have to make a compelling

showing that the qualifying programming it did air, along with any of

its other programming-related activities in its market, served the

educational and informational needs of children in that market as well

as or better than an additional amount of programming specifically

designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children.

Again, the Commission believes that, given the current level of

programming documented by the data submitted, the appropriate level of

a programming requirement would be 3 hours of core programming per

week, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment on this

suggestion and, as with the option of a processing guideline,

interested parties are invited to comment on whether it would be

appropriate to increase the requirement by, for example, one half hour

each year until a requirement of 5 hours of core programming per week

is established. A programming standard, or rule, may be easier to

administer and would give the Commission a broader range of sanctions

than a processing guideline. The Commission solicits comment on these

and other factors differentiating a processing guideline from a

standard.

15. There are a number of questions on which the Commission seeks

comment that are raised by both the option of a safe harbor processing

guideline and that of a programming standard. First, comment is sought

on the Commission's suggestion of a weekly processing guideline or

programming standard averaged over a specified period, and the

Commission asks for ideas as to the period of time over which a

guideline or standard should be averaged. The Commission also seeks

comment on the extent to which repeats during a weekly schedule and

later reruns of programs should be counted toward fulfillment of any

processing guideline or programming requirement that might be adopted.

Second, the Commission seeks comment as to whether a processing

guideline or programming requirement should be the same for all

stations regardless of station type or market size. Third, it has been

publicly suggested that to give stations an incentive to air high-

quality programming, a programming requirement should be based entirely

on a certain amount of rating points. The Commission invites comment on

this suggestion and on whether it would be appropriate for either a

processing guideline or a programming standard.

16. Finally, interested parties are asked to provide the Commission

with further data and related information. The Commission requests in

particular detailed information regarding any potential opportunity

costs (i.e., the difference in profits from children's educational

programming and from other programming that might be aired instead) for

broadcasters that would be created by the implementation of a

processing guideline or programming requiring set at various levels.

More specifically, the Commission requests that commenters provide us

with one or more studies that quantify any such costs for stations in

different sized markets, as well as for the broadcasting industry as a

whole. The Commission urges commenters to ensure that the sample data

used to develop estimates of any opportunity costs that stations might

face are representative and that the methodology used to develop the

estimates is clearly explained. The Commission also reiterates to all

interested parties the importance of providing information and studies,

in addition to those already on record, documenting changes in the

nature and amount of children's educational programming on the air,

especially recently. In providing such studies, commenters should bear

in mind that the utility of the material already presented to us in

this inquiry is limited. For example, the results of certain station

surveys accept at face value station claims as to the educational

consent of their programming, and our experience with such claims

suggests that the figures produced by these studies may be inflated.

The Commission notes that if data were submitted that show that the

educational and informational needs of children are being met

consistent with the goals of the CTA, we would reassess the need for

further action.

17. In weighing alternatives for further Commission action, the

Commission must consider any limitations imposed by the First Amendment

of the Constitution. Even assuming that the Commission's proposals were

found to be content-based restrictions on speech, some restrictions on

content have been judged permissible when applied to broadcasting

because of the scarcity of frequencies and broadcasters' concomitant

duty to provide public service. To be consistent with the First

Amendment, content-based restrictions on speech in the broadcasting

context must be narrowly tailored to further a substantial government

interest. The Commission tentatively concludes, and the case law

suggests, that the government has a substantial interest in furthering

the education and welfare of children through implementation of the

CTA. The courts have held that there is a compelling government

interest in ``safeguarding the physical and psychological well being of

a minor.''\3\ [[Page 20589]] The legislative history of the CTA states

that ``[i]t is difficult to think of an interest more substantial than

the promotion of the welfare of children who watch so much television

and rely upon it for so much of the information they receive.''\4\ The

Commission seeks comment on whether each of the proposed alternatives

for improving implementation of the CTA is narrowly tailored to further

the CTA's interest in furthering the education and welfare of children

and on its analysis of First Amendment issues as discussed in

paragraphs 66 through 73 in the full text of this NPRM.

\3\Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 852 F.2d 1332, 1343

n. 18 (D.C. Cir. 1988) and Supreme Court Cases cited therein.

\4\Senate Report at 17; see also House Report at 11.

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

18. The Commission also seeks comment on possible revisions to our

license renewal procedures that might encourage the public to take a

more active role in urging stations to comply with the CTA and reduce

the government's role in reviewing such compliance. Thus, the

Commission seeks comment on whether it should require any party filing

a petition to deny to show that he or she had first attempted to

resolve the alleged problem with the station in question, and whether,

if we implement a safe harbor processing guideline or a programming

standard licensees should be permitted to certify whether they have

aired the prescribed amount of core programming.

19. Finally, the Commission solicits comment on a number of general

and specific issues regarding ``program sponsorship'' rules. If the

Commission adopts either a safe harbor processing guideline or a

programming standard, such rules would give licensees the option of

either themselves airing the entire prescribed amount of children's

educational programming, or airing a portion of the prescribed amount

themselves and taking responsibility for the remainder by providing

financial or other ``in-kind'' support for programming aired on other

stations in their market. The station sponsoring educational programs

shown elsewhere would take credit for these programs at license renewal

time. We conclude that the CTA precludes allowing a licensee to meet

either a processing guideline or programming standard entirely by

sponsoring programming on other stations in the same market. The

Commission thus suggests that under either option each station be

required to air at least 1 hour of core educational and informational

programming itself and that each be allowed to fulfill the remaining

hours by sponsoring core programming on other stations. The Commission

also seeks comment on the tentative views expressed in the full text of

the NPRM regarding how a program sponsorship system should work. The

CTA and the Commission's rules already permit stations to receive

credit at license renewal time for supporting educational programming

on another station in their market, and the Commission has held that if

one station produces or buys children's programs broadcast on another

station, so as to qualify under 47 U.S.C. 303b(b)(2), both stations may

rely on such programming in their license renewal applications. The

Commission now seeks comment on whether that holding was correct, or

whether it undermines the CTA by permitting ``double counting.'' It

appears that, at least for the purpose of meeting a processing

guideline or programming requirement, stations that air sponsored

programming (``host'' stations) should not be permitted to claim credit

for such programming.

20. It is also the Commission's view that a station should be

allowed to sponsor programs for the purpose of meeting a processing

guideline or programming requirement only on host stations that serve

largely the same potential viewers. On the other hand, the Commission

does not believe that we should require sponsor and host stations to

serve exactly the same area because such a requirement would unduly

limit the program sponsorship options available in many markets. Taking

into account these competing considerations, it would seem sensible to

require that, when any portion of a station's programming that is

claimed to satisfy a processing guideline or programming requirement

consists of programming shown on another station, the signal of the

host station cover 80 percent of either the community of license or the

area encompassed within the grade A or grade B contour of the sponsor

station. The Commission seeks comment on these ideas and on other

issues relevant to program sponsorship. For example, the Commission

asks for comment on what types of information about sponsored programs

should be provided to the public, and whether antitrust law would limit

the extent to which stations in a market may cooperate through program

sponsorship efforts.

21. If the Commission adopts either a processing guideline or a

programming standard, we would intend that the resulting regulatory

changes would be made on a provisional or experimental basis, rather

than as permanent changes. It is the Commission's hope that any such

guideline or standard, together with the other changes we propose, will

effectuate a significant improvement in television broadcasters'

service to children, and also will enable parents to monitor the

performance of stations in their communities and ensure through their

actions that the CTA's objectives are met. In accordance with these

expectations, and to ensure periodic review of the necessity and

efficacy of a guideline or standard, the Commission invites comment on

whether to sunset any regulatory changes related to the possible

implementation of either of these two options, absent additional

Commission action, on December 31, 2004, unless affirmatively extended

by the Commission. This date is one year after the close of the renewal

cycle for the last group of stations to come up for renewal after rules

would be adopted in this proceeding, and would allow the Commission,

prior to the sunset, the opportunity to evaluate fully the effects of

any rules adopted here. Thus, it would be our intention to undertake a

review prior to the sunset date.

22. In conclusion, with this proceeding, the Commission intends to

enhance the public's ability to monitor station compliance with the

CTA, to clarify its rules and policies governing educational

programming for children to provide licensees with greater certainty as

to the scope of their children's programming obligation, and to ensure

that the amount of educational and informational programming provided

by television broadcasters comports with the goals of the CTA. The

Commission believes that these objectives can be achieved by increasing

the flow of information to the public about the children's programming

that stations are broadcasting, and by adopting a definition of

programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational

and informational needs. In addition, we intend to take further

action--in the form of instituting monitoring procedures, processing

guidelines or a programming standard--in order to ensure that all

children have access, as Congress intended, to an adequate supply of

educational and informational programming specifically designed for

them. The Commission seeks comment on all aspects of our proposals, and

welcomes other ideas commenters may have to achieve the objectives

outlined herein.

V. Administrative Matters

23. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and

1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested

parties may file comments on or before June 16, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 17, 1995. To file formally in this

[[Page 20590]] proceeding, you must file an original plus four copies

of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want

each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must

file an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply

comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available

for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20554.

24. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking

proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the

Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the

Commission Rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203 and 1.1206(a).

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement

I. Reason for the Action

This proceeding was initiated to explore ways to implement the

Children's Television Act of 1990 more effectively.

II. Objective of This Action

The actions proposed in this NPRM are intended to give licensees

clear, simple, and fair guidance regarding their children's programming

obligation; to increase the flow of programming information to the

public to facilitate enforcement of the Children's Television Act of

1990; and to allow the marketplace to determine to the fullest extent

possible the means that licensees use to meet their programming

obligation. Other objectives are to increase the amount of available

television broadcast programming that meets the educational and

informational needs of children and to promote efficiency in the

production and distribution of such programming.

III. Legal Basis

Authority for the actions proposed in this NPRM may be found in

Sections 1 and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47

U.S.C. 151, 303; and Section 103 of the Children's Television Act of

1990, 47 U.S.C. 303b.

IV. Number and Type of Small Entities Affected by the Proposed Rules

Approximately 1,200 existing commercial television broadcasters of

all sizes may be affected by the proposals contained in this NPRM.

V. Reporting, Record-keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements

Inherent in the Proposed Rule

The NPRM seeks comment on modifying current record-keeping and

reporting requirements to include a requirement that licensees

demonstrate compliance with proposed rule changes in their children's

programming report, and seeks comment on requiring licensees to make

programming information more accessible to the public. The NPRM seeks

comment on whether stations should be required to separate their

children's programming reports from other material in the public

inspection file and broadcast announcements to alert the public of the

existence of such reports. It also seeks comment on a certification

requirement that would replace the current requirement for submission

of detailed documentation to the Commission for those stations able to

certify that they have met a safe harbor processing guideline or

programming standard.

VI. Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate, or Conflict With the

Proposed Rule

None.

VII. Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small

Entities and Consistent With the Stated Objectives of the Action

The proposals contained in this NPRM are designed to encourage

television broadcast programming that satisfies the requirements of the

Children's Television Act of 1990, while minimizing the impact on small

entities.

25. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA) of the expected impact on small entities of the proposals

suggested in this document. Written public comments are requested on

the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same

filing deadlines as comments on the rest of this NPRM, but they must

have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to

the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Secretary shall send a

copy of this Notice of Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of

the Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a)

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5

U.S.C. Section 601 et seq (1981).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95-10176 Filed 4-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-M