[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54972-54977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-27225]


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

FEDERAL COMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[CS Docket No. 01-290; FCC 01-307]


Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and 
Competition Act of 1992 and the Development of Competition and 
Diversity in Video Programming Distribution: Section 628(c)(5) of the 
Communications Act--Sunset of Exclusive Contract Prohibition.

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission issues this document in accordance with section 
628(c)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Section 
628(c)(2)(D) generally prohibits, in areas served by a cable operator, 
exclusive contracts for satellite cable programming or satellite 
broadcast programming between vertically integrated programming vendors 
and cable operators. Under section 628(c)(5), the prohibition on 
exclusive programming contracts contained in section 628(c)(2)(D) will 
cease to be effective on October 5, 2002, unless the Commission finds 
that such prohibition continues to be necessary to preserve competition 
and diversity in the distribution of video programming. The document 
initiates a proceeding in order to make that determination.

DATES: Comments are due December 3, 2001 and reply comments are due 
January 7, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
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 Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected], and to 
Edward C. Springer, Office of Management and Budget, Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW., Room 10236, 
NEOB, Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Kosar, Cable Services Bureau 
at 202-418-1053 or via the Internet at [email protected]. For additional 
information concerning the information collection(s) contained in this 
NPRM, contact Judy Boley at 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM) initiating the proceeding in CS-Docket No. 01-290. 
The complete text of this NPRM is available for inspection and copying 
during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, 
Courtyard Level, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC, and also may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, 
Portals II, 445 12th Street, S.W. Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554.
    This NPRM contains a proposed 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 collection(s) 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

[[Page 54973]]

NPRM; OMB notification of action is due December 31, 2001. 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 Control Number: 3060-0551.
    Title: Section 76.1002 Specific Unfair Practices Prohibited.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Type of Review: Revision.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Number of Respondents: 52 (26 petitions and 26 oppositions).
    Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour-25 hours. We estimate that the 
total burden for completion of all aspects of the proceeding will be no 
more than 25 hours. We estimate that 50% of entities will use outside 
counsel and will undergo a burden of 1 hour to coordinate information 
with outside counsel.
    Total Annual Burden: 676 hours. (26 respondents with outside 
counsel  x  1 hour = 26 hours. 26 respondents with outside counsel  x  
25 hours = 650 hours.
    Total Annual Costs: $97,500.00 26 respondents using outside counsel 
at $150 per hour= 26  x  25  x  $150 = $97,500.00.
    Needs and Uses: This information is used by Commission staff to 
determine on a case-by-case basis whether particular exclusive 
contracts for cable television programming comply with the statutory 
public interest standard of Section 19 of the Cable Television Consumer 
Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and Section 628 of the 
Communications Act, as amended. Section 301(j) of the 1996 Act amends 
the restriction in section 628 to include common carriers and their 
affiliates that provide video programming.

Synopsis of the NPRM

    1. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking involves the possible sunset 
of section 628(c)(2)(D) of the Communications Act, which generally 
prohibits, in areas served by a cable operator, exclusive contracts for 
satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming between 
vertically integrated programming vendors and cable operators. Pursuant 
to section 628(c)(5), the prohibition on exclusive programming 
contracts contained in section 628(c)(2)(D) will cease to be effective 
on October 5, 2002, unless the Commission conducts a proceeding and 
finds that such prohibition continues to be necessary to preserve and 
protect competition and diversity in the distribution of video 
programming.
    2. The program access provisions contained in section 628 of the 
Communications Act were adopted as part of the Cable Television 
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. When adopting the 
statute, Congress was concerned by its finding that a majority of cable 
operators enjoyed a monopoly in program distribution at the local 
level, and concluded that the use of exclusive contracts between 
vertically integrated programming vendors and cable operators served to 
inhibit the development of competition among distributors.
    3. Section 628(c) instructs the Commission to adopt regulations to 
prohibit a number of specific practices. For example, Congress 
absolutely prohibited exclusive contracts between vertically integrated 
programming vendors and cable operators in areas unserved by cable, 
and, pursuant to section 628(c)(2)(D), generally prohibited exclusive 
contracts within areas served by cable. Congress recognized, however, 
that in areas served by cable some exclusive contracts between 
vertically integrated programming vendors and cable operators may serve 
the public interest. Accordingly, in determining whether an exclusive 
contract is in the public interest for purposes of section 
628(c)(2)(D), Congress instructed the Commission to consider the 
factors outlined in section 628(c)(4). The prohibition contained in 
section 628(c)(2)(D) regarding restrictions on exclusive contracts is 
not unlimited and Congress determined that after a ten-year period the 
Commission should determine in a proceeding conducted pursuant to 
section 628(c)(5) whether such prohibition continues to be necessary.
    4. The Notice seeks comment on: (1) Whether section 628(c)(2)(D) of 
the Communications Act should cease to be effective pursuant to the 
sunset provision contained in section 628(c)(5); (2) the effect, if 
any, section 628(c)(2)(D) has had on competition in local and national 
markets; (3) the degree to which, if at all, clustering and the 
continuing consolidation within the communications industry should 
inform our decision on the possible sunset of the exclusivity 
prohibition; (4) the effects of exclusivity in the multichannel video 
programming marketplace; (5) the impact the prohibition on exclusivity 
has had on diversity in programming; (6) whether it would be advisable, 
and consistent with the Commission's statutory authority, to retain the 
rule only for some types of programming or in some specific cases; (7) 
how other program access provisions would function should the 
exclusivity prohibition sunset; (8) what future procedures the 
Commission should undertake if the prohibition on exclusivity is 
retained; and (9) any other issues appropriate to our inquiry in 
accordance with section 628(c)(5).

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    5. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended, (``RFA''), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') of the possible significant economic 
impact on small entities by the policies and rules referenced in this 
NPRM. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must 
be identified as responses to this IRFA and must be filed by the 
deadlines for comments in the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of 
the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration. In addition, the IRFA (or summaries 
thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.

I. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Regulatory Approaches

    6. The purpose of section 628 of the Communications Act is to 
promote the public interest, convenience, and necessity by increasing 
competition and diversity in the multichannel video market, to increase 
the availability of satellite cable programming and satellite broadcast 
programming to persons in rural and other areas not currently able to 
receive such programming, and to spur the development of communications 
technologies. Specifically, this proceeding involves section 
628(c)(2)(D), which prohibits, in areas served by a cable operator, 
exclusive contracts for satellite cable programming or satellite 
broadcast programming between vertically integrated programming vendors 
and cable operators unless the Commission determines that such 
exclusivity is in the public interest. The exclusivity prohibition set 
forth in section 628(c)(2)(D) ceases to be effective after a 10-year 
period ending October 5, 2002. Section 628(c)(5) of the Communications 
Act requires that restrictions on exclusive contracts, within areas 
served by cable, are to sunset unless the Commission finds, in

[[Page 54974]]

a proceeding conducted during the last year of such 10-year period, 
that such prohibition continues to be necessary to preserve and protect 
competition and diversity in the distribution of video programming. 
Pursuant to this statutory mandate and by this Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, we seek comment on whether section 628(c)(2)(D) should be 
retained or eliminated.

II. Legal Basis

    7. The authority for the action proposed in this rulemaking is 
contained in section 4(i), 303 and 628 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303 and 548.

III. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    8. The RFA directs the Commission to provide a description of and, 
where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that will 
be affected by the proposed rules. The RFA 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 Small Business 
Administration (``SBA'').
    9. SBA has developed a definition of small entities for cable and 
other pay television services, which includes all such companies 
generating $11 million or less in annual receipts. This definition 
includes cable system operators, closed circuit television services, 
direct broadcast satellite services, multipoint distribution systems, 
satellite master antenna systems and subscription television services. 
According to the Census Bureau data from 1992, there were 1,758 total 
cable and other pay television services and 1,423 had less than $11 
million in revenue. We address below each service individually to 
provide a more precise estimate of small entities.
    10. Cable Systems: The Commission has developed, with SBA's 
approval, our own definition of a small cable system operator for the 
purposes of rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a ``small 
cable company'' is one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers 
nationwide. We last estimated that there were 1,439 cable operators 
that qualified as small cable companies. Since then, some of those 
companies may have grown to serve over 400,000 subscribers, and others 
may have been involved in transactions that caused them to be combined 
with other cable operators. Consequently, we estimate that there are 
fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system operators that may be 
affected by the decisions and rules proposed in this NPRM.
    11. The Communications Act also contains a definition of a small 
cable system operator, which is ``a cable operator that, directly or 
through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1% of all 
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity 
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed 
$250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that there are 67,700,000 
subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an operator serving fewer 
than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its 
annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all of 
its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based on 
available data, we find that the number of cable operators serving 
677,000 subscribers or less totals approximately 1450. Although it 
seems certain that some of these cable system operators are affiliated 
with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250,000,000, we are 
unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of 
cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators 
under the definition in the Communications Act.
    12. Open Video Systems: Because OVS operators provide subscription 
services, OVS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of ``Cable and 
Other Pay Television Services.'' This definition provides that a small 
entity is one with $11 million or less in annual receipts. The 
Commission has certified approximately 25 OVS operators to serve 75 
areas, and some of those are currently providing service. Affiliates of 
Residential Communications Network, Inc. (``RCN'') received approval to 
operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, D.C. and 
other areas. RCN has sufficient revenues to assure us that they do not 
qualify as small business entities. Little financial information is 
available for the other entities authorized to provide OVS that are not 
yet operational. Given that other entities have been authorized to 
provide OVS service but have not yet begun to generate revenues, we 
conclude that at least some of the OVS operators qualify as small 
entities.
    13. Program Producers and Distributors: The Commission has not 
developed a definition of small entities applicable to producers or 
distributors of cable television programs. Therefore, we will use the 
SBA classifications of Motion Picture and Video Tape Production (NAICS 
Code 51211), Motion Picture and Video Tape Distribution (NAICS Code 
42199), and Theatrical Producers (Except Motion Pictures) and 
Miscellaneous Theatrical Services (NAICS Codes 56131, 71111, 71141, 
561599, 71151, 71112, 71132, 51229, 53249). These SBA definitions 
provide that a small entity in the cable television programming 
industry is an entity with $21.5 million or less in annual receipts for 
NAICS Codes 51211, 42199 and 51212, and $5 million or less in annual 
receipts for NAICS Codes 56131, 71111, 71141, 561599, 71151, 71112, 
51229, and 53249. Census Bureau data indicate the following: (a) There 
were 7,265 firms in the United States classified as Motion Picture and 
Video Production (NAICS Code 51211), and that 6,987 of these firms had 
$16.999 million or less in annual receipts and 7,002 of these firms had 
$24.999 million or less in annual receipts; (b) there were 1,139 firms 
classified as Motion Picture and Video Tape Distribution (NAICS Codes 
42199 and 51212), and 1007 of these firms had $16.999 million or less 
in annual receipts and 1013 of these firms had $24.999 million or less 
in annual receipts; and (c) there were 5,671 firms in the United States 
classified as Theatrical Producers and Services (NAICS Codes 56131, 
71111, 71141, 561599, 71151, 71121, 51229, and 53249), and 5627 of 
these firms had $4.999 million or less in annual receipts.
    14. Each of these NAICS categories are very broad and include firms 
that may be engaged in various industries, including cable programming. 
Specific figures are not available regarding how many of these firms 
exclusively produce and/or distribute programming for cable television 
or how many are independently owned and operated. Thus, we estimate 
that our rules may affect approximately 6,987 small entities primarily 
engaged in the production and distribution of taped cable television 
programs and 5,627 small producers of live programs that may be 
affected by the rules adopted in this proceeding.
    15. Direct Broadcast Satellite Service (``DBS''): Because DBS 
provides subscription services, DBS falls within the SBA-recognized 
definition of ``Cable and Other Pay Television Services.'' This 
definition provides that a small entity is one with $11 million or less 
in annual receipts. There are four licensees of DBS services under part 
100 of the Commission's rules. Three of those

[[Page 54975]]

licensees are currently operational. Two of the licensees that are 
operational have annual revenues that may be in excess of the threshold 
for a small business. The Commission, however, does not collect annual 
revenue data for DBS and, therefore, is unable to ascertain the number 
of small DBS licensees that could be impacted by these proposed rules. 
DBS service requires a great investment of capital for operation, and 
we acknowledge that there are entrants in this field that may not yet 
have generated $11 million in annual receipts, and therefore may be 
categorized as a small business, if independently owned and operated.
    16. Home Satellite Dish Service (``HSD''): Because HSD provides 
subscription services, HSD falls within the SBA-recognized definition 
of ``Cable and Other Pay Television Services.'' This definition 
provides that a small entity is one with $11 million or less in annual 
receipts. The market for HSD service is difficult to quantify. Indeed, 
the service itself bears little resemblance to other MVPDs. HSD owners 
have access to more than 265 channels of programming placed on C-band 
satellites by programmers for receipt and distribution by MVPDs, of 
which 115 channels are scrambled and approximately 150 are unscrambled. 
HSD owners can watch unscrambled channels without paying a subscription 
fee. To receive scrambled channels, however, an HSD owner must purchase 
an integrated receiver-decoder from an equipment dealer and pay a 
subscription fee to an HSD programming package. Thus, HSD users 
include: (1) Viewers who subscribe to a packaged programming service, 
which affords them access to most of the same programming provided to 
subscribers of other MVPDs; (2) viewers who receive only non-
subscription programming; and (3) viewers who receive satellite 
programming services illegally without subscribing. Because scrambled 
packages of programming are most specifically intended for retail 
consumers, these are the services most relevant to this discussion.
    17. According to the most recently available information, there are 
approximately four program packagers nationwide offering packages of 
scrambled programming to retail consumers. These program packagers 
provide subscriptions to approximately 1,476,700 subscribers 
nationwide. This is an average of about 370,000 subscribers per program 
package. This is smaller than the 400,000 subscribers used in the 
commission's definition of a small MSO. Furthermore, because this is an 
average, it is likely that some program packagers may be substantially 
smaller.
    18. Multipoint Distribution Service (``MDS''), Multichannel 
Multipoint Distribution Service (``MMDS'') and Local Multipoint 
Distribution Service (``LMDS''): MMDS systems, often referred to as 
``wireless cable,'' transmit video programming to subscribers using the 
microwave frequencies of the Multipoint Distribution Service (``MDS'') 
and Instructional Television Fixed Service (``ITFS''). LMDS is a fixed 
broadband point-to-multipoint microwave service that provides for two-
way video telecommunications.
    20. In connection with the 1996 MDS auction, the Commission defined 
small businesses as entities that had annual average gross revenues of 
less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. This 
definition of a small entity in the context of MDS auctions has been 
approved by the SBA. The MDS auctions resulted in 67 successful bidders 
obtaining licensing opportunities for 493 Basic Trading Areas 
(``BTAs''). Of the 67 auction winners, 61 met the definition of a small 
business. MDS also includes licensees of stations authorized prior to 
the auction. As noted, the SBA has developed a definition of small 
entities for pay television services, which includes all such companies 
generating $11 million or less in annual receipts. This definition 
includes multipoint distribution services, and thus applies to MDS 
licensees and wireless cable operators that did not participate in the 
MDS auction. Information available to us indicates that there are 
approximately 850 of these licensees and operators that do not generate 
revenue in excess of $11 million annually. Therefore, for purposes of 
the IRFA, we find there are approximately 850 small MDS providers as 
defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
    21. The SBA definition of small entities for pay television 
services, which includes such companies generating $11 million in 
annual receipts, appears applicable to ITFS. There are presently 2,032 
ITFS licensees. All but 100 of these licenses are held by educational 
institutions. Educational institutions are included in the definition 
of a small business. However, we do not collect annual revenue data for 
ITFS licensees, and are not able to ascertain how many of the 100 non-
educational licensees would be categorized as small under the SBA 
definition. Thus, we tentatively conclude that at least 1,932 licensees 
are small businesses.
    22. Additionally, the auction of the 1,030 LMDS licenses began on 
February 18, 1998 and closed on March 25, 1998. The Commission defined 
``small entity'' for LMDS licenses as an entity that has average gross 
revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 
An additional classification for ``very small business'' was added and 
is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average 
gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding calendar 
years. These regulations defining ``small entity'' in the context of 
LMDS auctions have been approved by the SBA. There were 93 winning 
bidders that qualified as small entities in the LMDS auctions. A total 
of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 277 A 
Block licenses and 387 B Block licenses. On March 27, 1999, the 
Commission re-auctioned 161 licenses; there were 40 winning bidders. 
Based on this information, we conclude that the number of small LMDS 
licenses will include the 93 winning bidders in the first auction and 
the 40 winning bidders in the re-auction, for a total of 133 small 
entity LMDS providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's 
auction rules.
    23. In sum, there are approximately a total of 2,000 MDS/MMDS/LMDS 
stations currently licensed. Of the approximate total of 2,000 
stations, we estimate that there are 1,595 MDS/MMDS/LMDS providers that 
are small businesses as deemed by the SBA and the Commission's auction 
rules.
    24. Satellite Master Antenna Television (``SMATV'') Systems. The 
SBA definition of small entities for ``Cable and Other Pay Television 
Services'' specifically includes SMATV services and, thus, small 
entities are defined as all such companies generating $11 million or 
less in annual receipts. Industry sources estimate that approximately 
5,200 SMATV operators were providing service as of December 1995. Other 
estimates indicate that SMATV operators serve approximately 1.5 million 
residential subscribers as of June 2000. The best available estimates 
indicate that the largest SMATV operators serve between 15,000 and 
55,000 subscribers each. Most SMATV operators serve approximately 
3,000-4,000 customers. Because these operators are not rate regulated, 
they are not required to file financial data with the Commission. 
Furthermore, we are not aware of any privately published financial 
information regarding these operators. Based on the estimated number of 
operators and the estimated number of units served by the largest ten 
SMATVs, we believe that a

[[Page 54976]]

substantial number of SMATV operators qualify as small entities.

IV. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    25. The NPRM seeks comment on the sunset of section 628(c)(2)(D) of 
the Communications Act. The NPRM does not propose any specific 
reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements.

V. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and 
Significant Alternatives Considered

    26. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in proposing regulatory approaches, 
which may include the following four alternatives: (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. The NPRM seeks comment on whether section 628(c)(2)(D) should 
cease to be effective, pursuant to the sunset provision in section 
628(c)(5), or whether section 628(c)(2)(D) should be retained. Thus, 
the NPRM invites comments on a number of issues that may significantly 
impact small entities. Specifically, the NPRM seeks comment in para. 8 
on the effect, if any, section 628(c)(2)D) has had on competition in 
local and national markets. The NPRM also seeks comment in para. 9 on 
the degree to which, if at all, clustering and the continuing 
consolidation within the communications industry should inform the 
Commission's decision on the possible sunset of the exclusivity 
prohibition. In para. 10, the NPRM seeks comment on the effects of 
exclusivity in the multichannel video programming marketplace. In para. 
11, the NPRM seeks comment on the impact the prohibition on exclusivity 
has had on diversity of programming. In para. 12, the NPRM seeks 
comment on how the program access provisions would function should the 
exclusivity prohibition sunset. In para.13, the NPRM seeks comment 
relationship of section 628(c)(2)(D) and section 628(c)(2)(C) of the 
Act, which affects areas not served by a cable operator. In para. 14, 
the NPRM seeks comment on how the proliferation of new programming 
services impacts assumptions with regard to exclusivity. If section 
628(c)(2)(D) is retained, the NPRM seeks comment in para. 15 on future 
procedures necessarily related to the retention of section 
628(c)(2)(D).

VI. Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Commission's Proposals

    27. There are no federal rules that specifically duplicate, overlap 
or conflict with the Commission's inquiry with regard to section 
628(c)(2)(D).

VII. Report to Congress

    28. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this 
IRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. In addition, the 
Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including IRFA, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of 
the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the 
Federal Register.

Paperwork Reduction Analysis

    29. This NPRM contains a proposed information collection. As part 
of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, we invite the 
general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to take 
this opportunity 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 December 31, 2001. 
Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection 
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.

Ex Parte Presentations

    30. This proceeding will be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding, subject to the ``permit-but-disclose'' requirements under 
Sec. 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. Ex parte presentations are 
permissible if disclosed in accordance with Commission rules, except 
during the Sunshine Agenda period when presentations, ex parte or 
otherwise, are generally prohibited. Persons making oral ex parte 
presentations are reminded that a memorandum summarizing a presentation 
must contain a summary of the substance and not merely a listing of the 
subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the 
views and arguments presented is generally required. Additional rules 
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in 
Sec. 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.

Comment Dates

    31. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and 
1.419 of the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments 
on or before December 3, 2001 and reply comments on or before January 
7, 2002. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. Comments filed 
through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to 
http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only one copy of an 
electronic submission must be filed. If multiple docket or rulemaking 
numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, however, commenters 
must transmit one electronic copy of the comments to each docket or 
rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the 
transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, Postal 
Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking 
number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-
mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should 
send an e-mail to [email protected], and should include the following words 
in the body of the message, ``get form your e-mail address.'' A sample 
form and directions will be sent in reply.
    32. Written comments by the public on the proposed information 
collection are due on December 3, 2001. Written comments must be 
submitted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed 
information collections on or before December 31, 2001. 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 Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, 
SW, Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected] and to 
Edward Springer, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to 
[email protected].
    33. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and 
four

[[Page 54977]]

copies of each filing. If participants want each Commissioner to 
receive a personal copy of their comments, an original plus nine copies 
must be filed. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in 
the caption of this proceeding commenters must submit two additional 
copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. All filings 
must be sent to the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, Office 
of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, 
S.W., Washington D.C. 20554. The Cable Services Bureau contact for this 
proceeding is Karen A. Kosar at (202) 418-7200, TTY (202) 418-7172, or 
at [email protected].
    34. Comments and reply comments 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. Persons with disabilities who need assistance in 
the FCC Reference Center may contact Bill Cline at (202) 418-0270, TTY 
(202) 418-2555, or [email protected]. Comments and reply comments are 
available electronically in ASCII text, Word 97, and Adobe Acrobat.
    35. This document is available in alternative formats (computer 
diskette, large print, audio cassette, and Braille). Persons who need 
documents in such formats may contact Brian Millin at (202) 418-7426, 
TTY (202) 418-7365, or [email protected].

Ordering Clauses

    36. Accordingly, It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
contained in sections 4(i), 303 and 628 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303 and 548, Notice is hereby given 
of the proposals described in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
    37. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer 
Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of 
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

    Administrative practice and procedure and Cable television.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-27225 Filed 10-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P