[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32061-32066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15389]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-138, RM-8855, 8856, 8857, 8858, 8872]


Main Studio and Public Inspection File of Broadcast Stations

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed Rule Making (``Notice'' or 
``NPRM''), the Commission seeks comment on the proposed amendment of 
its rules governing main studio and local public inspection file 
requirements for broadcast licensees. The Commission seeks comment on 
its proposals to relax the standard governing the location of the main 
studio and to allow the local public inspection file to be located at 
the broadcast station's main studio, wherever located. Comment is also 
sought regarding proposals to streamline the contents of the public 
inspection file. For additional information, see Supplementary 
Information.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before August 8, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before September 8, 1997. Written comments by the public 
on the proposed and/or modified information collections are due August 
8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In 
addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments 
on the information collections contained herein should be submitted to 
Judy Boley, Federal Communications

[[Page 32062]]

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554, or via 
the Internet to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria M. McCauley, Mass Media 
Bureau, 202) 418-2130. For additional information concerning the 
information collections contained in this NPRM contact Judy Boley at 
202-418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-138, adopted May 22, 
1997, and released May 28, 1997. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 
140, Washington, DC 20037.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rule Making on Main Studio and 
Public File

    1. As part of our continuing effort to ensure that our rules serve 
the public interest without imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens, we 
here consider relaxation of our broadcast main studio and local public 
inspection file rules. The main studio rule generally requires each AM 
radio, FM radio, and television broadcast station to maintain its main 
studio within its principal community signal contour. The local public 
inspection file rules require broadcast stations to maintain a number 
of records in a file that is accessible to the public. Our current 
rules require that this file be located at the station's main studio 
where the studio is situated in the station's community of license, or, 
if the main studio is outside the community of license, at any 
accessible place (such as a public registry for documents or an 
attorney's office) in the station's community of license. Both rules 
seek to ensure that members of the local community have reasonable 
access to station management and information about the station. This 
enables the residents of the community to monitor a station's public 
interest performance, and encourages a continuing dialogue between the 
station and its community.
    2. We have received a number of petitions for rule making regarding 
these rules. None of these petitions questions the underlying purposes 
served by the rules. Rather, they seek to relax various aspects of the 
rules in a manner they believe will lessen regulatory burdens on 
licensees without any detriment to the public interest. We placed these 
petitions on public notice, and received several comments and reply 
comments that generally supported the petitioners' proposals. We 
believe a number of these proposals may be in the public interest in 
that they would provide broadcast licensees additional flexibility in 
complying with the main studio and public inspection file rules, while 
at the same time ensuring that the rules continue to facilitate 
interaction between licensees and their local communities. This 
document seeks comment on the various issues raised by these proposals. 
We also take this opportunity to seek comment on various ways to update 
and clarify our local public inspection file rules.
    3. Main Studio Location. Prior to our most recent amendment of the 
rule, broadcasters were required to maintain their main studios in 
their community of license. In 1987, we relaxed the rule to permit a 
station to locate its main studio outside its community of license 
provided it is within its principal community contour. In doing so, we 
noted that the role of the main studio in the production of programming 
had diminished over the years, that community residents often 
communicate with stations by telephone or mail rather than visiting the 
studio, and that the growth of modern highways and mass transit systems 
had reduced travel times. We further observed that the revised rule 
would allow broadcasters to obtain certain efficiencies, such as 
colocating a station's studio at its transmitter site or moving the 
studio to lower cost areas. These factors persuaded us that relaxing 
the rule would provide broadcasters greater flexibility while at the 
same time ensuring that their main studios continued to be reasonably 
accessible to the communities they serve.
    4. Apex Associates and others filed a petition for rule making that 
proposes a further relaxation of the rule. It requests the Commission 
to amend the rule to provide that ``every AM, FM and TV station shall 
maintain a main studio which is so situated as to be reasonably 
accessible to residents of the station's community of license.'' The 
petition also proposes that the definition of ``reasonably accessible'' 
be left within the discretion of each licensee, or in the alternative, 
that this term be defined as ``within 30 minutes normal driving time'' 
from the community of license. All commenters support the proposed 
amendment to the rules.
    5. Discussion. The Apex petition presents several legitimate 
reasons for considering relaxation of the main studio rule. As an 
initial matter, the parties have pointed out that the current rule may 
be imposing undue burdens on licensees. There is a longstanding 
Congressional and Commission policy in favor of reducing regulatory 
burdens consistent with the public interest wherever appropriate. We 
also believe a review of the rule is particularly warranted in light of 
the recent changes in the local radio ownership rules. In 1987, the 
last time the main studio rule was revised, the maximum number of radio 
stations that a single licensee could own in a market was two: one AM 
and one FM. Subsequently, the Commission amended the local radio 
ownership rules to permit ownership of up to three commercial radio 
stations, no more than two in the same service, in radio markets with 
14 or fewer radio stations, provided that the owned stations, if other 
than a single AM and FM combination, represented less than 50 percent 
of the stations in the market; in markets with 15 or more commercial 
radio stations, the rules permitted ownership of up to two AM and two 
FM commercial radio stations if the combined audience share of the 
commonly owned stations did not exceed 25 percent in the market. In 
February 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications 
Act of 1996 (``1996 Act''), Public Law 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996), 
which further relaxed the local radio ownership limits. In the largest 
markets, for example, a single entity can now own up to eight 
commercial radio stations. A licensee owning two or more stations in 
the same area may find it most efficient to operate these stations from 
a centrally located studio/business office, yet the main studio rule 
would require it to maintain a separate main studio for one or more of 
its commonly-owned stations if they do not place a principal community 
contour signal over the central studio/office. As the Apex petition 
points out, this can impose substantial burdens on the licensee, 
depriving it of savings that could be put to more productive use for 
the benefit of the community served by the station. These burdens are 
also arguably inconsistent with the economies of scale that can be 
achieved through common ownership of stations that Congress implicitly 
found to be in the public interest in relaxing the local radio 
ownership rules in the 1996 Act.
    6. We also believe that review of the main studio rule is warranted 
because it may place disproportionate burdens on owners of smaller 
stations. The principal community contour of a broadcast station--the 
determinant of the main studio's location--varies greatly depending on 
a station's channel

[[Page 32063]]

or class. High power stations, which have principal community contours 
as great as 70 or 80 miles in diameter, consequently have greater 
flexibility in locating their main studios under the rule than low 
power stations, which can have principal community contours as small as 
20 miles in diameter. While the current rule serves to ensure that the 
main studio is located in the primary reception area of the station, 
the petitioners and commenting parties have raised concerns about the 
differential treatment between small and larger stations that call for 
a review of the rule's use of a principal community contour standard.
    7. We further note that, as some of the petitioners and commenters 
maintain, it is possible for a main studio to be outside the station's 
principal community contour and yet still be reasonably accessible to 
the community of license. For example, a location outside the principal 
community contour may be convenient to community residents because of 
its proximity to particular commuting patterns, access to public 
transportation or major highways, or the availability of ample public 
parking. The current rule may be too limited to take into account these 
possibilities. Conversely, many locations within a principal community 
contour may be difficult or relatively inconvenient to get to.
    8. Given the above factors, we generally propose to relax the main 
studio rule and replace the community contour standard with a new 
standard that gives licensees additional flexibility yet continues to 
ensure that the main studio is reasonably accessible to a station's 
community of license. We seek comment on this general proposal and its 
potential impact on the public interest. We particularly invite comment 
on the manner in which we should determine whether a station's main 
studio is reasonably accessible to the residents of its community of 
license.
    9. The Apex petition argues that the revised rule should simply 
require the main studio be ``reasonably accessible to residents of the 
station's community of license,'' leaving it to the discretion of each 
licensee to define what reasonable is in the first instance. As an 
alternative, the Apex Petition argues that ``reasonably accessible'' 
should be defined as ``within 30 minutes normal driving time'' from the 
community of license. While we seek comment on these options, we are 
not inclined to adopt them given their lack of clarity. While relaxing 
the rule, they would appear to create a significant amount of 
uncertainty for the public and licensees regarding the appropriate 
location of a station's main studio. Such a vague rule could make it 
difficult for licensees to determine whether a chosen site complies 
with the rule, and could generate numerous disputes which would have to 
be resolved by the Commission on an individual basis, which would be 
administratively inefficient.
    10. Another option would involve retaining the principal community 
contour standard and adopting a waiver policy that would allow a 
station to locate its main studio outside the contour in specified 
circumstances. Such a policy would permit the Commission to examine on 
a case-by-case basis commuting patterns, population densities, local 
transportation and highway systems, and other factors unique to each 
community. We are disinclined, however, to pursue this approach. It too 
would create considerable uncertainty and would impose substantial 
administrative burdens on both licensees and the Commission. We also 
note that our rules currently permit a licensee to seek a waiver of the 
Commission's main studio location requirement.
    11. We consequently favor a generally applicable rule that measures 
``reasonable accessibility'' in a manner that can be clearly and easily 
understood and applied. One way this could be accomplished is to 
require that the main studio be located within the principal community 
contour of any station licensed to the community of license in 
question. This would provide a clear, easy-to-apply rule, eliminate the 
differential treatment in the current rule between low and high power 
stations, and give many stations a larger area within which to choose a 
studio location. For example, in a community with a licensed Class A FM 
station and a licensed Class C FM station, either station could locate 
its main studio anywhere within the latter station's principal 
community contour, which generally has a radius of over 42 miles. We 
question, however, whether this would provide for a studio location far 
from the listeners of smaller stations. Accordingly, we seek comment on 
whether this approach provides sufficient flexibility to licensees 
while continuing to ensure that their main studios are reasonably 
accessible to the communities they serve.
    12. We also seek comment on using a straight mileage standard 
rather than relying on a measurement based on signal contours. In 
particular, the rule could be revised to require a station to locate 
its main studio within a radius of a set number of miles from a common 
reference point in the station's community of license, such as the 
community's city-center coordinates. Is this approach preferable to the 
use of signal contour standards? If the Commission adopts this 
approach, what mileage standard would be an appropriate measure of 
reasonable accessibility? Another option would combine the above two 
approaches: A station could choose to locate its main studio anywhere 
in the principal community contour of any station licensed to the same 
community, or within a set distance from the community center, 
whichever provides greater flexibility. Still another alternative would 
permit an entity that owns multiple stations in a market to co-locate 
the main studio for these stations at any one of the commonly owned 
stations, provided each of the stations is located in the same local 
market and that the main studio was within some set distance from the 
community center.
    13. We invite comment on these various approaches and any other 
proposals that commenters believe will serve the public interest by 
minimizing unnecessary regulatory burdens and ensuring that residents 
of a local community have reasonable access to the broadcast stations 
licensed to serve them. We emphasize that in proposing modifications to 
our main studio rule we in no way seek to alter the obligation of each 
broadcast licensee to serve the needs and interests of its community. 
As the Commission has long recognized, this is a bedrock obligation of 
every broadcast licensee. Rather, we propose to relax the main studio 
rule in a manner consistent with this obligation.
    14. Local Public Inspection File Location. The Commission requires 
a broadcast station to maintain its local public inspection file at its 
main studio in its community of license or at any accessible place in 
the community of license (e.g., an attorney's office or local public 
library) if the station's main studio is located outside the community. 
As with the main studio rule, reasonable access to the public 
inspection file facilitates monitoring of a station's operations and 
public interest performance by the public and encourages a community 
dialogue with local stations. This in turn helps ensure that stations 
are responsive to the needs and interests of their local communities.
    15. Several parties have filed their petitions for rule making 
requesting that the Commission amend the public inspection file rule to 
provide that the public file be maintained at the main studio, wherever 
located. These parties state that the main studio is the most

[[Page 32064]]

logical and likely location that members of the public would seek to 
find a station's public file. They also state that experience under the 
current rule has shown that files maintained outside the main studio 
are subject to mishandling, loss of documents, and destruction because 
the files are not under the daily supervision of the licensee. In 
addition, they claim that because so few members of the public actually 
seek access to the off-premises public file, the expense involved in 
maintaining that file often is not offset by any benefit to the public.
    16. Another party, Salem Communications Corp., proposes a different 
approach regarding the location of the public inspection file. It 
proposes that the Commission require any licensee who elects to locate 
its public file at its main studio outside its community of license to 
also accommodate the public in one of the three following ways: (1) 
Provide free transportation to the main studio; (2) deliver the public 
file to a location specified by the requestor; or (3) provide specified 
documents by mail.
    17. Discussion. We propose to amend our rules to permit both 
commercial and noncommercial stations to locate their local public 
inspection files at their main studios, wherever located. Coupled with 
our proposal above regarding the location of the main studio, this 
would place the public file at the same ``reasonably accessible'' 
location as the main studio, which would not necessarily be in the 
community of license. We also seek comment on reasonably accessible 
locations for the public file of an applicant for a new station or 
change of community. We propose that such a party maintain its file in 
the proposed community of license or at its proposed main studio.
    18. We recognize that in amending the main studio rule in 1987 the 
Commission determined that the public inspection file should be 
maintained in a station's community of license in order to assure 
meaningful public participation in our licensing process. The 
petitioners, however, have pointed to a number of public interest 
reasons in favor of permitting licensees to locate their public 
inspection files at their main studios, even when these are outside the 
station's community of license. Allowing this flexibility will reduce 
regulatory burdens on licensees while at the same time ensuring, as 
with our proposed amendment to the main studio rule, that the public 
file is reasonably accessible to residents of the local community, and 
could well increase the convenience to the public in some cases. 
Reasonable accessibility of the main studio and the public file has 
been our benchmark for facilitating public involvement at the station. 
We also believe that it would serve the public interest to provide 
stations greater flexibility in locating the public inspection file and 
main studio given the increased number of same-market, multiple-station 
owners under the new radio ownership rules. As described in our 
discussion of the main studio rule, this is consistent with the 
relaxation of these rules because it allows stations to avail 
themselves of economies of scale and allows them to channel their 
resources in ways that would better serve the public. In addition, it 
would appear that the main studio is the most logical and likely place 
for the public to expect to find a station's public inspection file, 
given that it will typically be listed in the local telephone 
directory. Furthermore, we believe the public would be better served if 
the file is maintained and stored under the direct control of the 
station. Not only would there be greater assurance that the file is 
kept up-to-date and in proper order, but also the public would be able 
to request assistance in researching the public file if necessary.
    19. We invite comment on our proposal to permit licensees to locate 
their local public inspection file at their main studio, even when the 
main studio is outside the station's community of license. We 
particularly seek comment on whether this will ensure that the public 
file continues to be reasonably accessible to a station's local 
community. We also ask broadcasters to describe specifically the 
efficiencies that can be achieved in providing greater flexibility 
under the rule, and how these efficiencies can benefit the public. 
Parties are invited to comment on the proposals advanced by Salem 
Communications Corp. to ensure public access, as described above, and 
any other such alternatives regarding the accessibility and location of 
the public inspection file that they believe would serve the public 
interest.
    20. Public Inspection File Contents. We also take this opportunity 
to seek comment on updating our requirements regarding the materials 
that a station must place in its public inspection file. As stated 
above, the public file contains information that facilitates meaningful 
public participation in monitoring licensee compliance with public 
interest obligations. The requirements regarding the contents of the 
public file for noncommercial educational stations are similar to those 
that apply to commercial stations, although there is some variation. 
Currently, the public inspection file for both commercial and 
noncommercial stations must contain general information pertaining to 
the station, such as certain applications and related materials the 
station may have filed with the FCC, ownership reports, employment 
reports, and a list of programs aired by the station during the 
previous three months that provided its most significant treatment of 
community issues (the ``issues/programs list''). Broadcast licensees 
must also maintain a separate file concerning broadcasts by political 
candidates. In addition, all commercial broadcast television licensees 
must maintain a public file containing information regarding the 
educational and informational children's programming they air pursuant 
to the Children's Television Act of 1990. The Commission recently 
revised these children's television public file requirements in its 
children's television proceeding.
    21. We propose to amend our rules to eliminate or revise certain 
aspects of the local public inspection file rules that are out-of-date 
or that require clarification. In particular, we plan to revise the 
rules as follows:
    (a) We propose to delete the requirement that licensees maintain in 
their public file the 1974 manual entitled ``The Public and 
Broadcasting.'' This manual is long out-of-date.
    (b) We will delete the reference in Sec. 73.3526(a)(11) of our 
rules regarding the maintenance of reports that were required under our 
financial interest and syndication rules, which have been repealed.
    (c) We will correct the cross-reference in the local public 
inspection file rules to the rule section governing a licensee's 
political file.
    (d) We plan to delete the note set forth under Secs. 73.3526(a)(1) 
and 73.3527(a)(1) of our rules. This note provides that certain 
applications filed on or before May 13, 1965--the date of a previous 
FCC Report and Order regarding the local public inspection file rules--
need not be placed in the station's public file. This exemption is no 
longer needed given that, even without the exemption, the retention 
periods for maintaining such applications have long since expired.
    We seek comment on these proposals and any other similar revisions 
that would serve to update or clarify the public inspection file rules. 
For instance, are there certain applications covered by the existing 
rule that no longer need to be maintained in the public file?
    22. We also consider here a proposal to revise our requirements 
regarding the responsibility for maintaining public

[[Page 32065]]

file materials when a station's license is assigned to a new owner. The 
rules provide that after the Commission approves an application for 
assignment of license and the transaction has been consummated, the 
assignee is responsible for ensuring that the public file contain all 
the documents previously required to be maintained in the file by the 
assignor. A petition for rule making filed by David Tillotson requests 
that the Commission amend the public file rule to delete this 
requirement. Tillotson maintains the proposed change is warranted 
because the public file need only contain information concerning the 
current licensee or permittee. According to Tillotson, the public has 
no practical use for information regarding the ownership, programming 
and EEO practices of a station's prior licensees, and therefore a new 
licensee should not be required to bear the burden of reconstructing 
the prior licensee's public file. As to this type of licensee-specific 
information, we believe there is merit to these arguments, and invite 
comment on amending our rules to relieve license assignees of this 
burden. We note, however, that there may be information in the public 
file relevant to a station's facilities (e.g., engineering material in 
a modification application filed by the assignor) that is not licensee-
specific and therefore should be maintained by the assignee. We seek 
comment on this issue.
    23. Finally, we propose to clarify the general requirement in 
Sec. 73.1202(a) of our rules that all written comments and suggestions 
received from the public by licensees of commercial AM, FM, and TV 
broadcast stations regarding operation of their station shall be 
maintained in the local public inspection file. We wish to clarify that 
such written comments and suggestions include electronic mail messages 
transmitted via the internet to stations that are capable of receiving 
them. Internet ``email'' is now commonly used by many members of the 
public and is increasing in popularity. Stations may print out a hard 
copy of such an internet message and place it in their public file. 
Parties are invited to comment on this proposed clarification.
    24. Retention Periods. We also take this opportunity to review the 
retention periods for the materials in a licensee's local public 
inspection file as well as its political file. These retention periods, 
set forth in Secs. 73.3526(e) and 73.3527(e) of the rules, vary 
depending on the type of record involved, as the following illustrative 
list indicates:
    (a) Political file materials, which are kept in a separate file, 
must be retained for two years.
    (b) With respect to commercial broadcast stations, letters received 
from members of the public must be retained for three years.
    (c) A licensee's issues/programs list must be retained for the term 
of the station's license, which the current rule states as five years 
for television licensees and seven years for radio licensees. This 
provision predates our recent decision extending both television and 
radio broadcast license terms to eight years.
    (d) A television licensee's documentation of its performance under 
the Children's Television Act of 1990 must be retained for the term of 
a station's license, which the current rule states as five years. 
Again, this provision predates the recent extension of license terms to 
eight years.
    (e) The various applications a station must place in its public 
file generally must be retained by a permittee or a licensee for a 
period beginning with the date that they are tendered for filing and 
ending with the expiration of one license term (five years for 
television licensees or seven years for radio licensees) or until the 
grant of the first renewal application of the television or radio 
broadcast license in question, whichever is later.
    25. We wish to ensure that our public file retention period 
requirements provide clear guidance to licensees and the public, 
facilitate meaningful public participation in monitoring licensee 
compliance with our rules and policies, and minimize unnecessary 
paperwork burdens on broadcasters. At a minimum, we propose to revise 
any public file retention periods that are tied to the broadcast 
license term (e.g., the issues/programs list) to reflect the new 
license term of eight years. This is consistent with the rule's purpose 
in providing the public access to information that is relevant to a 
station's performance throughout its license term, facilitating 
monitoring of licensee performance by interested parties as well as 
their participation in the license renewal process. In addition, we 
propose to amend the rules to reflect that all documents that are 
required to be retained for the license term be retained not only for 
the eight-year license term, but also until the grant of the renewal 
application is no longer subject to appeal either at the FCC or in the 
courts. This will ensure that the public has access to pertinent 
information regarding the licensee's performance during the pendency of 
its renewal application. We invite comment on this issue.
    26. We also seek comment on whether any of our public file 
retention periods can be shortened to reduce regulatory burdens 
consistent with the public interest. In particular, our current rules 
generally require a licensee to retain certain applications filed with 
the FCC until the expiration of one license term or until grant of the 
first renewal application of the television or radio broadcast license 
in question. The applications subject to this retention period include, 
for example, license assignment and transfer applications and 
applications for major facility modifications. We question the need to 
require licensees to retain these materials for this period of time, 
and propose that they retain such applications only during the period 
in which they are pending before the FCC or the courts. This would 
appear to be the period of time that they would have particular 
relevance to the public. We also note that other public file materials 
may provide an alternative source for the information contained in 
these applications; the ownership reports, for example, provide 
information about a licensee's ownership structure that can be found in 
an assignment or transfer application. We seek comment on this 
proposal. Are there some applications or parts of applications that 
should be kept for a longer period? For example, some applications 
contain an exhibit in support of a rule waiver and the Commission has 
granted the waiver based, in part, on the applicant's public interest 
representation. How long should the new owner be required to retain 
such an application or the waiver exhibit in its public file?
    27. We seek comment on other ways to clarify and streamline our 
retention period requirements. What are the appropriate retention 
periods for a licensee's annual employment reports and annual ownership 
reports? Should we modify the requirement that commercial stations 
retain letters from the public for three years? We particularly seek 
comment on the appropriate retention period for letters from the public 
regarding violent programming given the new statutory requirement that 
licensees summarize such letters in their renewal applications.
    28. An Electronic Public File Option. We recognize that many 
stations are equipped with computers and make information available to 
the public on their own World Wide Web home pages on the internet. We 
encourage stations to do so, as it facilitates a dialogue between 
licensees and their

[[Page 32066]]

communities that can lead to better service to the public. Indeed, in 
our recently completed children's television proceeding we encouraged 
stations to post their Children's Educational Programming Reports on 
their Web sites. We wish to explore other ways in which information now 
maintained in the local public inspection file could be made available 
to the internet.
    29. We realize, of course, that many Americans and broadcast 
stations do not have internet access or even computers. There may be 
options, however, that would allow stations to take advantage of this 
new technology in ways that reduce paperwork burdens while at the same 
time provide the public greater access to information about the 
station. For example, we seek comment on giving stations the option of 
maintaining all or part of the public inspection file in a computer 
database rather than in paper files. For example, commercial television 
licensees will soon be able to complete their Children's Television 
Programming Reports directly on their computers and then file them 
electronically with the FCC. A station that chooses to do so could also 
maintain these Reports in a computer file at its station rather than 
placing them in its ``paper'' public inspection file as it is presently 
required to do every quarter. The station that chooses this option 
would be required to make a computer terminal available to members of 
the public interested in reviewing the station's ``electronic'' public 
file, and also, as set forth under the current rules, would be required 
to provide paper copies of such public file materials on request. We 
would also encourage such stations to post their ``electronic'' public 
files on any World Wide Web sites they maintain. We seek comment on 
this option as well as other means of using computer technology to 
provide access to public inspection file materials.
    30. In this document we review various aspects of our main studio 
and local public inspection file rules. In doing so, we seek to 
minimize regulatory burdens and facilitate meaningful interaction 
between broadcast stations and the communities they serve. We have 
traditionally relied on this interaction as a primary means of ensuring 
that broadcasters are responsive to the needs and interests of their 
communities.
    31. Authority. This document is issued pursuant to authority 
contained in Secs. 4(i), 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154(i), 303, 307.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This NPRM contains either a proposed or modified information 
collection. 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 collections 
contained in this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same 
time as other comments on this NPRM; OMB comments are due August 11, 
1997. 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.
    OMB Approval Number: New Collection (will modify four existing 
collections: 3060-0171, Sec. 73.1125-Station main studio location; 
3060-0214, Sec. 73.3526-Local Public Inspection File of Commercial 
Stations; 3060-0215, Sec. 73.3527-Local Public Inspection File of 
Noncommercial Educational Stations; and 3060-0211, Sec. 73.1943-
Political File.
    Title: Review of the Commission's Rules regarding the main studio 
and local public inspection files of broadcast television and radio 
stations.
    Form No.: None
    Type of Review: New collection
    Respondents: Licensees/permittees of broadcast stations
    Number of Respondents, Estimated Time Per Response, Total Annual 
Burden: Section 73.1125 requires the filing of an estimated 135 
notifications per year with an average burden of 0.5 hours per request. 
Section 73.3526 requires an estimated 10,262 commercial radio stations 
to maintain a public inspection file. The average burden on a 
commercial radio licensee/permittee is 2 hours per week (104 hours per 
year) to maintain a public inspection file. We also estimate that 1,187 
commercial television stations will be required to maintain a public 
inspection file. The average burden on a commercial television 
licensee/permittee is 2.5 hours per week (130 hours per year) to 
maintain a public inspection file. These estimates for Sec. 73.3526 
contain only the burden associated with the public inspection file. 
Section 73.3527 requires an estimated 2,214 noncommercial educational 
radio and television stations to maintain a public inspection file. The 
average burden on such a licensee/permittee is 2 hours per week (104 
hours per year) to maintain a public inspection file. This estimate for 
Sec. 73.3527 contains only the burden associated with the public 
inspection file. With respect to Sec. 73.1943, we estimate that 25 
political broadcasts per station (13,664 stations) will be made and a 
record kept with an average burden of 0.25 hours per request. The total 
annual burden for these collections is 1,537,282 hours. These figures 
are contingent on any decision reached upon adoption of a Report and 
Order.
    Needs and Uses: The main studio and public file rules seek to 
ensure that members of the local community have access to the broadcast 
stations that are obligated under the FCC's rules to serve them. This 
rule making proceeding seeks to relieve undue regulatory burdens while 
retaining basic obligations of broadcast licensees to serve their 
communities of license.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR Secs. 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television broadcasting, Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-15389 Filed 6-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P