[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72144-72158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30009]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MB Docket Nos. 00-168; 00-44; FCC 11-162]


Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for Television 
Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations; Extension of the Filing 
Requirement for Children's Television Programming Report (FCC Form 398)

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on a proposed 
requirement that each television station's public inspection file be 
made available in an online public file to be hosted on the 
Commission's Web site.

DATES: Comments for this proceeding are due on or before December 22, 
2011; reply comments are due on or before January 6, 2012. Written PRA 
comments on the proposed information collection requirements contained 
herein must be submitted by the public, Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB), and other interested parties on or before January 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket Nos. 00-168 
and 00-44, by any of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Federal Communications Commission's Electronic Comment Filing 
System (ECFS) Web Site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    People With Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable 
accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: (202) 418-
0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
    In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any 
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection 
requirements contained herein should be submitted to the Federal 
Communications Commission via email to [email protected] and to Nicholas A. 
Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via email to [email protected] or via fax at (202) 395-5167. For detailed 
instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the 
rulemaking process, see the supplementary information section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Holly Saurer, [email protected] of the Media 
Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-2120. For additional information 
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection 
requirements

[[Page 72145]]

contained in this document, send an email to [email protected] or contact 
Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 11-162, adopted and released 
on October 27, 2011. The full text is available for public inspection 
and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS at 
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will be available 
electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete 
text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th 
Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative formats are 
available for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), by sending an email to [email protected] 
or calling the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 
(202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    This document contains proposed information collection 
requirements. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork 
burden and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission invites the 
general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following 
information collections. Public and agency comments are due January 23, 
2012.
    Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on the respondents, including the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In 
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment 
on how we might ``further reduce the information collection burden for 
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
    To view or obtain a copy of this information collection request 
(ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to this OMB/GSA Web page: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web 
page called ``Currently Under Review,'' (3) click on the downward-
pointing arrow in the ``Select Agency'' box below the ``Currently Under 
Review'' heading, (4) select ``Federal Communications Commission'' from 
the list of agencies presented in the ``Select Agency'' box, (5) click 
the ``Submit'' button to the right of the ``Select Agency'' box, and 
(6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for 
the OMB control number of this ICR as show in the Supplementary 
Information section below (or its title if there is no OMB control 
number) and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC 
submission to OMB will be displayed.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-0214.
    Title: Sections 73.3526 and 73.3527, Local Public Inspection Files; 
Sections 76.1701 and 73.1943, Political Files.
    Form Number: Not applicable.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for-profit 
entities; Not for-profit institutions; Individuals or households.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 25,422 respondents; 59,833 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour to 104 hours.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; 
Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
    Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The 
statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in 
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307 and 308.
    Total Annual Burden: 2,158,909 hours.
    Total Annual Costs: $801,150.00.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: The PIA is in progress.
    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Respondents may request 
materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from 
public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.
    Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this 
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This 
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that support 
the Commission's public file rules that are codified at 47 CFR 73.3526 
and 73.3527. 47 CFR 73.3526 and 73.3527 require that licensees and 
permittees of commercial and noncommercial AM, FM and TV stations 
maintain a file for public inspection at its main studio or at another 
accessible location in its community of license. The contents of the 
file vary according to type of service and status. The contents 
include, but are not limited to, copies of certain applications 
tendered for filing, a statement concerning petitions to deny filed 
against such applications, copies of ownership reports, statements 
certifying compliance with filing announcements in connection with 
renewal applications, a list of donors supporting specific programs, 
and a list of community issues addressed by the station's programming.
    These rules also specify the length of time, which varies by 
document type, that each record must be retained in the public file. 
The public and FCC use the data to evaluate information about the 
licensee's performance and to ensure that station is addressing issues 
concerning the community to which it is licensed to serve.
    The proposed information collection requirements consist of: 
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.1943(d), television station licensees or 
applicants must place all of the contents of its political file on the 
Commission's Web site.
    Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(b), commercial television 
station licensees or applicants must place the contents of their public 
inspection file as required by 47 CFR 73.3526(e) on the Commission's 
Web site, with the exception of letters and emails from the public as 
required by 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(9), which will be retained at the 
station. A station must also link to the public inspection file hosted 
on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if 
the station has a Web site. The Commission will automatically link the 
following items to the electronic version of all licensee and applicant 
public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission has these 
items electronically: authorizations, applications, contour maps; 
ownership reports and related materials; portions of the Equal 
Employment Opportunity file held by the Commission; the public and 
broadcasting; Children's television programming reports; and DTV 
transition education reports. In the event that the online public file 
does not reflect such required information, the licensee will be 
responsible for posting such material.
    Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(18), commercial television 
stations must include in their public file

[[Page 72146]]

a copy of every agreement or contract involving sharing agreements for 
the station, including local news sharing agreements and shared 
services agreements, whether the agreement involves stations in the 
same markets or in differing markets, with confidential or proprietary 
information redacted where appropriate.
    Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(19), commercial television 
stations must include in their public file a list of all sponsorship 
identifications that must be announced on-air pursuant to 47 CFR 
73.1212.
    Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.3527(b) non-commercial educational 
television station licensees or applicants must place the contents of 
their public inspection file as required by 47 CFR 73.3527(e) on the 
Commission's Web site, with the exception of letters and emails from 
the public as required by 47 CFR 73.3527(e)(9), which will be retained 
at the station. A station must also link to the public inspection file 
hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web 
site, if the station has a Web site. The Commission will automatically 
link the following items to the electronic version of all licensee and 
applicant public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission 
has these items electronically: contour maps; ownership reports and 
related materials; portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file 
held by the Commission; and the public and broadcasting. In the event 
that the online public file does not reflect such required information, 
the licensee will be responsible for posting such material.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-0174.
    Title: Sections 73.1212, 76.1615 and 76.1715, Sponsorship 
Identification.
    Form Number: N/A.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for profit 
entities; Individuals or households.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 22,761 respondents and 
1,831,610 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: .0011 to .2011 hours.
    Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; Third party 
disclosure; On occasion reporting requirement.
    Total Annual Burden: 242,633 hours.
    Total Annual Cost: $33,828.
    Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The 
statutory authority for this collection is contained in sections 4(i), 
317 and 507 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Respondents may request 
materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from 
public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.
    Privacy Impact Assessment(s): The PIA is in progress.
    Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this 
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This 
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that will 
change the availability of record disclosures under 47 CFR 73.1212. 47 
CFR 73.1212(e) states that, when an entity rather than an individual 
sponsors the broadcast of matter that is of a political or 
controversial nature, the licensee is required to retain a list of the 
executive officers, or board of directors, or executive committee, 
etc., of the organization paying for such matter in its public file.
    The proposed information collection requirements consist of: 
Pursuant to the changes proposed 47 CFR 73.1212(e) and 47 CFR 
73.3526(e)(19), this list, which could contain personally identifiable 
information, would be located in a public file to be located on the 
Commission's Web site instead of being maintained in the public file at 
the station. Burden estimates for this change are included in OMB 
Control Number 3060-0214.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-0466.
    Title: Sections 73.1201, 74.783 and 74.1283, Station 
Identification.
    Form Number: Not applicable.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents/Affected Parties: Business or other for-profit 
entities; Not for-profit institutions.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 24,158 respondents; 24,158 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.166-1 hour.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; 
Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
    Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or maintain benefits. The 
statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in 
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307 and 308.
    Total Annual Burden: 23,324 hours.
    Total Annual Costs: None.
    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: No need for confidentiality 
required with this collection of information.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
    Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval for this 
proposed information collection from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). On October 27, 2011, the Commission released a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket Nos. 00-168 and 00-44; FCC 11-162. This 
rulemaking proposed information collection requirements that support 
the Commission's station identification announcements that are codified 
at 47 CFR 73.1201. 47 CFR 73.1201(a) requires television broadcast 
licensees to make broadcast station identification announcements at the 
beginning and ending of each time of operation, and hourly, as close to 
the hour as feasible, at a natural break in program offerings. 
Television and Class A television broadcast stations may make these 
announcements visually or aurally.
    The proposed information collection requirements consist of: 
Pursuant to proposed 47 CFR 73.1201(b)(3), three times a week, the 
station identification for television stations must include a notice 
stating that the station's public file is available for viewing at the 
FCC's Web site. At least one of the announcements must occur between 
the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight.
    The Commission is seeking OMB approval for the proposed information 
collection requirements.

Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

    1. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking we take steps to 
modernize the way television broadcasters inform the public about how 
they are serving their communities. We seek comment on the proposals 
set forth below. Our goals in this proceeding are to make information 
concerning broadcast service more accessible to the public by taking 
advantage of current technology, thereby improving dialogue between 
broadcast stations and the communities they serve, and if possible 
reduce the compliance burdens on broadcasters. This item also seeks to 
further the goal of modernizing the Commission's processes and 
expeditiously transitioning from paper to digital technology in order 
to create efficiencies and reduce costs both for government and the 
private sector.
    2. Specifically, we propose to largely replace the decades-old 
requirement that commercial and noncommercial television stations 
maintain a paper public file at their main studios with a requirement 
to submit documents for

[[Page 72147]]

inclusion in an online public file to be hosted by the Commission. We 
seek comment on ways to streamline the information required to be kept 
in the file, such as by excluding letters and emails from the public. 
We also propose that we should require that sponsorship identification, 
now disclosed only on-air, also be disclosed in the online public file, 
and propose to require disclosure online of shared services agreements. 
We seek comment on what steps we can implement in the future to make 
the online public file standardized and database compatible, further 
improving the usefulness of the data. The new proposals that the 
Commission host the online public file and that the online file largely 
replace the paper file at the main studio will meet the longstanding 
goals of this proceeding, to improve public access to information about 
how broadcasters are serving their communities, while at the same time 
significantly reducing compliance burdens on the stations. We propose 
to limit these reforms to television licensees at this time given that 
this proceeding has always been limited to television broadcasters. We 
will consider at a later date whether to apply similar reforms to radio 
licensees.

II. Background

    3. One of a television broadcaster's fundamental public interest 
obligations is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests 
of its community of license. Broadcasters are afforded considerable 
flexibility in how they meet that obligation, but they must maintain a 
public inspection file, which gives the public access to information 
about the station's operations and enables members of the public to 
engage in an active dialogue with broadcast licensees regarding 
broadcast service. Among other things, the public inspection file must 
contain an issues/programs list, which describes the ``programs that 
have provided the station's most significant treatment of community 
issues during the preceding three month period.'' \1\ The original 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding grew out of a prior 
Notice of Inquiry, which explored the public interest obligations of 
broadcast television stations as they transitioned to digital.\2\ In 
the 2000 NPRM, the Commission concluded that ``making information 
regarding how a television broadcast station serves the public interest 
easier to understand and more accessible will not only promote 
discussion between the licensee and its community, but will lessen the 
need for government involvement in ensuring that a station is meeting 
its public interest obligation.'' The Commission tentatively concluded 
to require television stations to use a standardized form to report on 
how they serve the public interest. The Commission also tentatively 
concluded to require television licensees to make the contents of their 
public inspection files, including the standardized form, available on 
their stations' Internet Web sites or, alternatively, on the Web site 
of their state broadcasters association. In 2007, the Commission 
adopted a Report and Order implementing these proposals.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(12).
    \2\ Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for 
Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations, Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, 65 FR 62683 (2000) (``NPRM''); In the Matter of 
Public Interest Obligations of TV Broadcast Licensees, Notice of 
Inquiry, 65 FR 4211 (1999)(``NOI'').
    \3\ In the Matter of Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure 
Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest 
Obligations, Report and Order, 73 FR 13452 (2007) (``Report and 
Order''); In the Matter of Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure 
Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest 
Obligations, Erratum, 73 FR 30316 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Following the release of the Report and Order, the Commission 
received petitions for reconsideration from several industry 
petitioners and public interest advocates. The industry petitioners 
raised a number of issues regarding the standardized form and the 
online posting requirement, generally contending that the requirements 
were overly complex and burdensome. Public interest advocates argued 
that the political file \4\ should be included in the online public 
file requirement rather than exempted as provided in the Report and 
Order, and that the standardized form should be designed to facilitate 
the downloading and aggregation of data for researchers. In addition, 
five parties appealed the Report and Order, and the cases were 
consolidated in the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. 
The DC Circuit granted a petition to hold the proceeding in abeyance 
while we review the petitions for reconsideration. Challenging the 
rules in a third forum, several parties opposed the information 
collection contained in the Report and Order at the Office of 
Management and Budget (``OMB'') under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 
Because of the multiple petitions for reconsideration, the Commission 
has not transmitted the information collection to OMB for its approval, 
and therefore the rules adopted in the Report and Order have never gone 
into effect.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Sections 73.3526(e)(6), 73.3527(e)(5) and 73.1943 of the 
Commission's rules require that stations keep as part of the public 
inspection files a ``political file.''
    \5\ See also 47 CFR 73.3526, effective date nt. 2; 47 CFR 
73.3526, effective date note; 47 CFR 73.1201, effective date note 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. In June 2011, a working group including Commission staff, 
scholars and consultants released ``The Information Needs of 
Communities'' (``INC Report''), a comprehensive report on the current 
state of the media landscape.\6\ The INC Report discussed both the need 
to empower citizens to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities 
in exchange for the use of public spectrum, and also the need to remove 
unnecessary burdens on broadcasters who aim to serve their communities. 
The INC Report provided several recommendations relevant to this 
proceeding, including eliminating unnecessary paperwork and moving 
toward an online system for public disclosures in order to ensure 
greater public access. The INC Report also recommended requiring that 
when broadcasters allow advertisers to dictate content, they disclose 
the ``pay-for-play'' arrangements online as well as on the air in order 
to create a permanent, searchable record of these arrangements and 
afford easy access by consumers, competitors and watchdog groups to 
this information. The Report also suggested that governments at all 
levels collect and publish data in forms that make it easy for 
citizens, entrepreneurs, software developers, and reporters to access 
and analyze information in order to enable mechanisms that can present 
the data in more useful formats, and noted that greater transparency by 
government and media companies can help reduce the cost of reporting, 
empower consumers, and foster innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``The Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media 
Landscape in a Broadband Age,'' by Steven Waldman and the Working 
Group on Information Needs of Communities (June 2011), available at 
http://www.fcc.gov/infoneedsreport. As noted in the INC Report, the 
views of the report ``do not necessarily represent the views of the 
Federal Communications Commission, its Commissioners or any 
individual Bureaus or Offices.'' Id. at 362.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. In the Order on Reconsideration, we conclude, in light of the 
reconsideration petitions we received with respect to the Report and 
Order and the comments and replies thereto, that the best course of 
action is to vacate the rules adopted in the Report and Order and 
develop a new record upon which we can evaluate our public file and 
standardized form requirements. In this FNPRM we seek comment on some 
of the proposals the parties put forth on reconsideration and other 
ideas as well to improve public access to information about how 
broadcasters are serving their

[[Page 72148]]

communities while minimizing the burdens placed upon broadcasters. We 
also invite commenters to suggest any other changes that would promote 
these goals and modernize the provision of data to the public. We note 
that we are only addressing the online public file requirement in this 
FNPRM. Due to the complexity of the issues surrounding the replacement 
of the issues/programs list with a standardized form, we intend to 
promptly issue a separate Notice of Inquiry in a new docket seeking 
comment on the standardized form. We ask commenters to limit the 
comments filed in this docket to those related to the online posting 
requirement.

III. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    7. In this FNPRM, we seek input on how to create a modernized 
online public file requirement that increases public accessibility 
while taking into account and reducing where possible the burdens 
placed on broadcasters. First, we propose to largely replace the paper 
public file requirement with an online public file to be hosted by the 
Commission. We then seek comment on ways to streamline the information 
required to be kept in the file, and whether new items, such as 
sponsorship identifications and shared services agreements, should be 
disclosed online. We also seek comment on what steps we can implement 
in the future to make the online public file standardized and database 
compatible.

A. Placing the Public File Online

    8. The Commission first adopted a public inspection file rule more 
than 40 years ago. The public file requirement grew out of Congress' 
1960 amendment of sections 309 and 311 of the Communications Act of 
1934 (the ``Act'').\7\ Finding that Congress, in enacting these 
provisions, was guarding ``the right of the general public to be 
informed, not merely the rights of those who have special interests,'' 
\8\ the Commission adopted the public inspection file requirement to 
``make information to which the public already has a right more readily 
available, so that the public will be encouraged to play a more active 
part in dialogue with broadcast licensees.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 47 U.S.C. 309 and 311.
    \8\ Report and Order in Docket No. 14864 at 1666.
    \9\ Id. at 1667.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. A station's public file is currently composed of both items that 
have to be filed with the Commission and items that are only available 
in the public file at the station. The items that have to be filed with 
the Commission or are otherwise available on the Commission's Web site, 
and their retention periods, are:
     FCC Authorizations (as required by 73.3526(e)(1), 
73.3527(e)(1)) (retain until replaced);
     Applications and related materials (as required by 
73.3526(e)(2), 73.3527(e)(2)) (retain until final action taken on the 
application); \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Applications for a new construction permit granted pursuant 
to a waiver showing and applications for assignment or transfer of 
license granted pursuant to a waiver showing must be retained for as 
long as the waiver is in effect. In addition, license renewal 
applications granted on a short-term basis must be retained until 
final action has been taken on the license renewal application filed 
immediately following the shortened license term. See 47 CFR 
73.3526((e)(2), 73.3527(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Contour Maps (as required by 73.3526(e)(4), 73.3527(e)(3)) 
(retain as long as they reflect current, accurate information regarding 
the station);
     Ownership reports and related materials (as required by 
73.3526(e)(5), 73.3527(e)(4)) (retain until a new, complete ownership 
report is filed with the FCC); \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See also 47 CFR 73.3613 (specifying the contracts, 
instruments and documents required to be filed with the FCC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(7), 73.3527(e)(6)) (retain until final action 
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
     The Public and Broadcasting manual (as required by 
73.3526(e)(8), 73.3527(e)(7)) (retain most recent version 
indefinitely);
     Children's television programming reports (Form 398) (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(11)(iii)) (retain until final action taken on 
the station's next license renewal application);
     DTV transition education reports (Form 388) (as required 
by 73.3526(e)(11)(iv), 73.3527(e)(13)) (retain one year after last 
filed).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Stations only need to retain these quarterly reports in 
their files for one year, and they must only be included through the 
quarter in which the station concludes its DTV transition education 
campaign. See 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(11)(iv), 73.3527(e)(13). While 
almost all full-power television stations successfully transitioned 
to digital technology in 2009 and no longer need to retain these 
files, a few of these stations are not yet operating at full power 
and continue to be required to include Form 388 in their files.

The following items are only available at the station:
     Citizen agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(3)) (retain 
for term of agreement);
     Political file (as required by 73.3526(e)(6), 
73.3527(e)(5)) (retain for two years);
     Portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(7), 73.3527(e)(6)) (retain until final action 
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
     Letters and emails from the public (as required by 
73.3526(e)(9)) (retain three years from receipt);
     Material relating to FCC investigations and complaints (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(10), 73.3527(e)(11)) (retain until notified in 
writing that the material may be discarded);
     Issues/Programs lists (as required by 73.3526(e)(11)(i), 
73.3527(e)(8)) (retain until notified in writing that the material may 
be discarded);
     Donor lists for non-commercial educational channels 
(``NCEs'') (as required by 73.3527(e)(9)) (retain for two years from 
the date of the broadcast of the specific program reported);
     Records concerning children's programming commercial 
limits (as required by 73.3526(e)(11)(ii)) (retain until final action 
taken on the station's next license renewal application);
     Local public notice certifications and announcements (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(13), 73.3527(e)(10)) (retain for as long as the 
application to which it refers); \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See also 47 CFR 73.3580(h) (directing placement of 
certifications and announcements into the public file).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Time brokerage agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(14)) 
(retain for as long as contract or agreement in force);
     Must-carry or retransmission consent elections (for 
commercial stations) or must-carry requests (noncommercial stations) 
(as required by 73.3526(e)(15), 73.3527(e)(12)) (retain for duration of 
election or request period);
     Joint sales agreements (as required by 73.3526(e)(16)) 
(retain for as long as contract or agreement in force);
     Class A TV continuing eligibility documentation (as 
required by 73.3526(e)(17)) (retain indefinitely);
     A list of chief executive officers or members of the 
executive committee of an entity sponsoring or furnishing broadcast 
material concerning political matter or matter involving the discussion 
of controversial issues of public importance (as required by 
73.1212(e)) \14\ (retain for two years).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This rule allows for the required list to be retained 
instead at the network headquarters where the broadcast is 
originated by the network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. In the Report and Order the Commission required television 
stations that have Internet Web sites to place their public inspection 
files on their stations' Web sites and to make these files available to 
the public without charge. As an alternative, the Commission determined 
that stations could place their public inspection files

[[Page 72149]]

on their state broadcasters association's (``SBA'') Web site, where 
permitted by the SBA to do so. Several petitioners opposed this 
requirement, finding it costly and overly burdensome.
    11. We continue to believe that making all station public files 
available online is beneficial to the public, and necessary to provide 
meaningful access to the information in the 21st century. The evolution 
of the Internet and the spread of Internet access has made it easier to 
post material online, made it easier for consumers to read material 
online, and increased the public policy efficacy of disclosure 
requirements. As the Commission noted in the Report and Order, by 
making the file available through the Internet, we hope to facilitate 
access to the file information and foster increased public 
participation in the licensing process. The information provided in the 
public file is beneficial to consumers who wish to weigh in on a 
station's license renewal. We note that the Commission rarely denies 
license renewal applications due to the licensee's failure to meet its 
public interest programming obligation. Easy access to public file 
information will also assist the Commission, Congress, and researchers 
as they fashion public policy recommendations relating to broadcasting 
and other media issues. Therefore, we tentatively conclude that 
television broadcasters should be required to make most of the required 
documents in their public inspection files available online, in lieu of 
maintaining all of the documents in paper files or electronic format 
available at their main studios. Currently, the public has access to 
public inspection files only by visiting the main studio--which may not 
be convenient--during regular business hours. Making the information 
available online will provide 24-hour access from any location, without 
requiring a visit to the station, thereby greatly increasing public 
access to information on actions a station has taken to meet its public 
interest obligation. The Internet is an effective and cost-efficient 
method of maintaining contact with, and distributing information to, 
broadcast viewers. We understand the concerns that broadcasters have 
presented regarding the costs necessary to create and host an online 
public file. We believe that technological advances in the intervening 
years since this requirement was contemplated, along with changes to 
the proposed requirements that are discussed below, in particular the 
Commission's proposal to expend its resources and assume the burden of 
hosting of the public files, will mitigate broadcasters' concerns. 
Given the wide-spread availability of internet access and our goal of 
limiting costs for broadcasters, we also believe that continuing to 
require a complete paper public file is largely unnecessary and that 
the costs of such a duplicative requirement cannot be justified.
1. Commission Hosting of Online Public File
    12. Several participants in this proceeding have expressed concern 
about the costs required for broadcasters to create and host their own 
online public file. A few reconsideration petitioners suggested that 
the Commission should instead host the public file on its Web site, 
arguing that such a solution would be less burdensome to licensees, and 
would also be more efficient, since many public file items are already 
filed with the Commission. For instance, the Named State Broadcasters 
Association argued in its petition for reconsideration that the costs 
of hosting online public files should be borne by the Commission 
instead of individual stations, estimating that this will save 
broadcasters over $24 million in first-year costs, and almost $14 
million in annual costs thereafter.
    13. We tentatively agree that the paper public file requirement 
should be largely eliminated, and replaced with an online public file 
requirement hosted on the Commission's Web site. We believe it will be 
more efficient for the public and less burdensome for broadcasters to 
have all or most of their public files available in a centralized 
location. Pursuant to this approach, a member of the public could enter 
a station's call sign and access an electronic version of the public 
file, making the Commission's Web site a one-stop shop for information 
about broadcast television stations. This would be easier for the 
public than searching for individual stations' Web sites, which would 
have been required under the Report and Order. Because more than a 
third of the required contents of the public file have to be filed with 
the Commission in our Consolidated DataBase System (``CDBS'') under 
current rules, we propose that we will import and update any 
information that must already be filed with the Commission 
electronically in CDBS to each station's public file, which will be 
part of a database of all television station public files on the 
Commission's Web site.\15\ This will create efficiencies for 
broadcasters and centralize information for the public. Under this 
mechanism, broadcasters would be responsible for uploading only those 
items not otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the 
Commission's Web site. We expect that in order to upload information 
into its online public file, stations will need to log in, likely with 
their FCC Registration Numbers. We seek comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A successful upload of a station's public file on the 
Commission's Web site would not be considered agency approval of the 
material contained in the filing. As with paper public files, the 
Commission staff would not review the material placed in each 
station's online public file for purposes of determining compliance 
with Commission rules on a routine basis. Thus, the purpose of 
online hosting would simply be to provide the public with ready 
access to the material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. We believe that requiring broadcasters to upload the required 
items to their online public files housed on the Commission Web site 
will not be unduly burdensome. With the exception of those categories 
discussed below, stations will be required to upload only those types 
of documents currently maintained in their public files and ensure that 
the online file contains all required information. Thus, for example, 
if a station does not have time brokerage agreements, joint sales 
agreements, or citizen agreements, there would be nothing in these 
categories for the station to upload, and the station would merely have 
to indicate that the category was not applicable. Stations that do have 
such agreements must only update them when the agreements change, or 
remove them when the agreements expire. Stations will also be expected 
to maintain their online public files actively, making sure they 
contain information as required by the public file rules and removing 
of items that are no longer required to be retained under our rules. 
Broadcasters have raised concerns about inclusion of some of the items 
listed above, such as the political file and letters and emails from 
the public. We seek comment on specific issues related to those items 
below.
    15. We also propose that stations will need to retain electronic 
copies for back-up purposes of all of the public file items to prepare 
for the unlikely event that the Commission's online public file 
database were to become unavailable or disabled. We do not believe that 
these electronic copies should be made generally available as an 
alternative to the Commission-hosted online public file. Therefore, we 
propose that such electronic copies need only be available to the 
Commission, and not the public, unless the online public file becomes 
unavailable or disabled for any reason, in which case stations must 
make their

[[Page 72150]]

copies available to the general public in whatever format they choose. 
Should copies of any items in the public file be more readily 
available? For instance, due to the short seven-day deadline to request 
equal opportunity appearances, and the importance of candidates having 
prompt access to the political file, particularly in the days leading 
up to an election, should additional steps be taken to ensure that 
access to the political file is maintained? Should we require that 
stations make the back-up political file information available to 
candidates, their representatives, and the public at their stations, in 
whatever format they prefer, at least in the short term as we gain 
experience with the files being hosted by the FCC? We note that 
whatever requirement we ultimately adopt, stations can continue to make 
the public file available locally if they choose to do so. We believe 
that once all public file documents are available electronically, it 
will not be burdensome to keep electronic copies at the station. We 
also consider it likely that broadcasters would retain electronic 
copies of such documents in the ordinary course of business. We seek 
comment on this proposal, including estimates of any burden imposed by 
this requirement. We also seek comment on how long such copies should 
be maintained. Should copies be retained for the same length of time 
that each item must be retained under our existing rules?
    16. Two petitioners on reconsideration suggested that broadcasters 
should be permitted to limit online public file access to viewers 
within a station's geographic coverage area. We see no reason to limit 
online access to the public file, and seek comment on this tentative 
conclusion. As we noted in the Report and Order, we believe it entirely 
consistent with Congressional intent in adopting section 309 of the Act 
to embrace a public file requirement that enhances the ability of both 
those within and those beyond a station's service area to participate 
in the licensing process. Additionally, allowing access to people 
within and outside the station's service area creates no additional 
burden; indeed, limiting it to local residents would require taking 
additional steps to screen those seeking access to a particular file. 
In addition, limiting access to those in a geographic area would 
prevent local residents from accessing the information while they are 
temporarily outside the region.
    17. Transition. A reconsideration petitioner proposed reducing the 
burden on licensees by limiting the online public file to material 
generated after any new rules become effective, thereby grandfathering 
all prior paper filings. We do not agree with this proposal. Pursuant 
to this approach, only items created after the adoption of the online 
public file requirement would be required to be uploaded, not items 
currently in the paper files. As previously stated, we believe that the 
one-time electronic scanning and uploading of existing documents, both 
from the current licensee and any prior licensee, would not be unduly 
burdensome and that adopting a grandfathering approach would be 
confusing to those seeking access to the information.\16\ Those viewing 
an online public file might remain unaware of the existence of 
documents in the paper public file. Moreover, such an approach would 
necessitate the continued maintenance of a robust paper file, 
diminishing the benefits of the online file in terms of improved public 
access to information. We seek comment on this view.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ We recognize that an implementation plan needs to be 
developed to enable all television stations to post their public 
file documents in an orderly manner, possibly with rolling 
implementation dates. The Bureau, on delegated authority, will 
develop an implementation schedule and provide any necessary 
guidance regarding implementation issues at the appropriate time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Accessibility. In the Report and Order, the Commission 
determined that television licensees must make their Web site public 
files accessible to people with disabilities. Many Petitioners asked 
for clarification of this requirement. The INC Report noted that the 
recently passed Twenty-First Century Communications and Video 
Accessibility Act will help ensure that people with disabilities will 
have access to new media. The Public Interest Public Airwaves Coalition 
(``PIPAC'') has requested that the Commission require broadcasters to 
ensure that the portions of their Web sites that host the public file 
are accessible to people with disabilities. Because the Commission is 
proposing to host all online public files, we do not believe that such 
a requirement will be necessary for these purposes.\17\ We intend to 
ensure that the online public files, like the rest of the Commission's 
Web site, are accessible to people with disabilities. Under section 508 
of the Rehabilitation Act, federal agencies must ensure that members of 
the public who are disabled and who are seeking information or services 
from a Federal agency ``have access to and use of information and data 
that is comparable to the access to and use of the information and data 
by such members of the public who are not individuals with 
disabilities.'' \18\ The Commission's Web site complies with this law. 
We invite comment on this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ While we do not address any Web site accessibility 
requirements at this time, we encourage broadcasters to provide the 
information currently available on their Web site in an accessible 
manner, as well as provide information about accessible programming, 
such as that with video description, as part of their efforts to 
meet the public interest obligation. Station Web sites can be a 
primary source of information for consumers and providing 
information, particularly about accessible programming, in an 
accessible manner would be beneficial to viewers.
    \18\ See 29 U.S.C. 794d(1)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Application of Online Posting Rule to Specific Public File 
Components
    19. Political File. In the Report and Order, the Commission 
excluded the political file from the Web site posting requirement, 
determining that the burden of placing a station's political file 
online outweighed the benefit of posting this information, which is 
most heavily used by candidates and their representatives. In a 
petition for reconsideration of the Report and Order, CLC et al. asked 
the Commission to reconsider the exclusion, contending that the 
decision focused exclusively on the interests of the candidates and 
broadcasters and not the public, researchers, and public interest 
organizations that also need to access the files. In response, NAB 
argued that the Commission correctly determined to exempt stations' 
political files from the Web site posting requirement, as this approach 
is consistent with the Commission's prior exemption of political files 
from the requirement that stations make copies of documents in the 
public file available to persons that call the station. More recently, 
PIPAC has argued that placing political file information online will 
reduce the burden on broadcasters, who often receive multiple daily in-
person requests to access this information during an election season.
    20. We propose that the political file should not be exempted from 
the online public file requirement. We agree with CLC et al. that the 
public is entitled to ready access to these important files. Since 
exempting the political file in 2007, we have learned that the vast 
majority of television stations handle political advertising 
transactions electronically, through emails and a variety of software 
applications. As a result, requiring them to make this information 
publicly available online appears to impose far less of a burden than 
previously thought. We emphasize, however, that the online political 
file would serve as a source of information to candidates, buyers, 
viewers, and others, but that the actual purchase of

[[Page 72151]]

advertising time and the receipt of equal time requests would continue 
to be handled by the station. We seek comment on these proposals and 
the relative burdens and benefits that broadcasters would face under 
this requirement. We also seek comment about the logistics of making 
this file available online. Our rules currently require that records 
should be placed in the political file ``as soon as possible'' and ``as 
soon as possible means immediately absent unusual circumstances.'' \19\ 
We tentatively conclude that stations should similarly be required to 
upload the same records to their online political file ``immediately 
absent unusual circumstances.'' Immediacy is necessary with respect to 
the political file because a candidate has only seven days from the 
date of his opponent's appearance to request equal opportunities for 
that appearance. We also seek comment on methods and procedures that 
can be implemented to enable the near real-time upload of political 
file documents during periods of heightened activity. Can the 
Commission assist in making tools available to enable such immediate 
uploads and make such immediate filing as non-burdensome as possible?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See 47 CFR 73.1943(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. Finally, we note that the public file rule requires licensees 
to keep ``a complete and orderly'' political file. Accordingly, we 
would expect licensees to upload any political file information to the 
online file in an organized manner so that the political file does not 
become difficult to navigate due to the sheer number of filings. For an 
online political file to be useful, candidates and members of the 
public must be able to easily find information that they seek. Should 
the Commission create federal, state, and local subfolders for each 
station's political file? Should we allow stations to create additional 
subfolders within the political file? For instance, should stations be 
able to create subdivisions within federal, state and local races, to 
reflect individual political races? We seek comment on any other 
methods of organization that would make the information more easily 
accessible, and also lessen the number of questions that broadcasters 
would have to field about the contents and organization of the 
political file.
    22. Letters From the Public. A station must currently retain in its 
paper public file all letters and emails from the public regarding 
operation of the station unless the letter writer has requested that 
the letter not be made public or the licensee feels that it should be 
excluded due to the nature of its content, such as a defamatory or 
obscene letter. In the 2007 Report and Order the Commission determined 
that stations would not be required to post letters from the public on 
their online public files, due to the burden and cost. The Commission 
did, however, require that public comments sent by email to the station 
be placed in the station's online public file, as the costs of posting 
correspondence already in electronic form would be less burdensome on 
the station than uploading paper comments to electronic form. Several 
reconsideration petitioners asked that we also exempt email from the 
posting requirement, arguing that requiring their inclusion raises 
privacy concerns. They asserted that posting emails from children 
online may result in violations of the Children's Online Privacy 
Protection Act, which prohibits posting children's personally 
identifiable information online. These petitioners also argued that the 
Commission oversimplified the costs of such a requirement, since 
station personnel would need to review and redact all emails to strip 
them of personally identifiable information before posting them. The 
public interest community responded that privacy concerns could be 
ameliorated through the use of warnings to posters that their 
submissions would become part of the public file, and that an online 
form could be used that conceals personal information. More recently, 
PIPAC recommended that the Commission eliminate letters and email from 
the online public file requirement. They suggest that in order to alert 
members of the public to letters and emails, stations should instead be 
required to disclose the total number of letters available at the 
station and provide a notice that these materials are available for 
public viewing at the main studio consistent with existing paper public 
file rules.
    23. We propose that letters and emails from the public should not 
be required to be placed online. We agree that the privacy and burden 
concerns discussed above are significant enough to merit their 
exclusion. Letters and emails from the public that are currently 
included in the public file, like the rest of the file's contents, are 
already publicly available. We recognize that making this information 
available online would make it much more readily accessible to the 
public, but such increased accessibility may not be expected by viewers 
who communicate with their stations and may actually make some viewers 
less inclined to write to their stations. We seek comment on whether 
the concerns discussed above justify our proposal to exempt such 
communications from the online disclosure requirement. Alternatively, 
should we allow or require stations to redact personally identifiable 
information before posting online? While we propose that the online 
public file should largely replace the paper public file, we seek 
comment on PIPAC's proposal to require broadcasters to continue to 
retain copies of such letters at the station for public viewing in a 
paper file or an electronic database at their main studios. We envision 
that such a requirement would be limited to correspondence, and would 
not require any other public file information be publicly available at 
the station. Would such a correspondence file requirement be limited 
enough in scope to justify any additional burdens? We also seek comment 
on PIPAC's proposal to require stations to report quarterly on how many 
letters they have received. What would be the benefits of requiring 
stations to count and report how many letters they have received? What 
would be the burdens of such a requirement? Should we consider 
requiring a brief description of the letter(s) received? We seek 
comment on these and any other suggestions or proposals that would make 
letters and emails from the public more easily accessible while at the 
same time addressing privacy concerns. We also seek comment on whether 
stations should have to retain comments left by the public on social 
media pages, like Facebook. Should those be considered ``written 
comments and suggestions received from the public regarding operation 
of the station''? We tentatively conclude that such information should 
not be required to be maintained in the correspondence file. We seek 
comment on this tentative conclusion. We also seek comment on whether 
any other contents of the public file raise similar privacy concerns, 
such as donor lists that NCEs must include in the public file, as 
required by 73.3527(e)(9).
    24. Contour maps. Maps showing stations' service contours are 
available on the Commission's Web site, and are derived from 
information provided by stations in the CDBS. Stations are also 
required to include contour maps in their public files; unlike the ones 
available on the Commission's Web site, these include the station's 
service contours and/or main studio and transmitter location. In their 
petition for reconsideration of the Report and Order, the Joint 
Broadcasters asked whether the availability of contour maps on the 
Commission's Web site is sufficient. We believe that the contour maps 
available on the Commission's Web site are

[[Page 72152]]

sufficient as they provide necessary information regarding a station's 
service contours, and seek comment on this issue. We discuss requiring 
information about a station's main studio in section 3 below.
    25. The Public and Broadcasting manual. We propose to eliminate the 
requirement that stations make available ``The Public and 
Broadcasting'' manual in their public files. ``The Public and 
Broadcasting'' is a consumer manual that provides an overview of the 
Commission's regulation of broadcast radio and television licensees. 
This manual is already available on the Commission's Web site. As we 
look to centralize all public inspection files, we no longer believe it 
will be necessary for every station's electronic public file to contain 
this manual, nor will stations need to keep a copy at the station. 
Instead, we propose to make ``The Public and Broadcasting'' prominently 
available within the public file portion of the Commission's Web site 
once it is created. We seek comment on this proposal.
    26. Issues/programs lists. All broadcasters must currently include 
in their public files issues/programs lists covering the current 
license term, which are a lists of programs that have provided the 
stations' most significant treatment of community issues during the 
preceding quarter. In the 2007 Report and Order, we noted the 
deficiencies of the issues/programs lists, and replaced the requirement 
with a standardized disclosure form, subject to final OMB approval, as 
discussed above. As noted above, we have vacated the 2007 Report and 
Order. Although the issues/programs list required under the current 
rules provides some information to the public and establishes a record 
of some of a station's community-oriented programming, we continue to 
believe that it suffers from several drawbacks and intend to promptly a 
Notice of Inquiry to seek further input on a new standardized form. We 
propose that broadcasters should be required to post to their online 
public file, on a quarterly basis, their issues/programs lists required 
under current rules, until the Commission replaces the issues/programs 
list with a new standardized form, which we seek to address in an 
expedited fashion. We seek comment on this proposal.
    27. FCC investigations and complaints. Stations are required to 
maintain in their public file material relating to a Commission 
investigation or complaint. A petition for reconsideration of the 
Report and Order suggested excluding from a station's online public 
file any material that is the subject of an indecency investigation or 
complaint. The petitioner argued that posting materials related to an 
indecency investigation online would be inappropriate, since it is 
inconsistent with the purpose of the Commission's indecency regime, 
which is to protect children. They argued that because children have 
easy access to an online public file, but not to a station's paper 
public file, any material related to indecency investigations should be 
available in a station's paper public file only. We think it is 
important that material relating to indecency investigations not be 
excluded from the online public file, given its relevance to the 
renewal process. We do not believe that making this information 
available in the public file portion of the Web site will increase the 
risk to children, since the Commission already posts materials related 
to indecency investigations on its Web site. We seek comment on this 
proposal. We also seek comment on whether the FCC should post published 
sanctions, including forfeiture orders, notices of violation, notices 
of apparent liability, and citations, in a station's online public 
file. If so, should licensees be required to upload their responses, if 
any, to these FCC actions? We believe that this is the sort of 
information that the public would want to find in reviewing a 
licensee's public file, and is a natural extension of the requirement 
to retain FCC correspondence. We note that parties could seek 
confidential treatment of particular information in the filings, if 
necessary.
3. Potential Items To Be Added to the Online Public File Requirement
    28. The INC Report noted the importance of making online disclosure 
a pillar of media policy and the public's need to have a more granular 
understanding of how broadcasters use their stations and serve the 
public. Given that we seek to modernize public disclosure requirements, 
we also seek comment on adding main studio information, sponsorship 
identification information, and any sharing agreements to a station's 
online public file. While we seek to avoid unduly burdening 
broadcasters, we do not believe that this modest expansion of the 
public file will be burdensome and we believe that this information 
will be useful to the public.
    29. Main Studio Information. As discussed above, stations are 
currently required to include contour maps in their public files, which 
must include the station's service contours and/or main studio and 
transmitter location. The contour maps available on the Commission's 
Web site, which we propose today to fulfill the online public file 
requirement, does not include main station information. Further, the 
Commission does not require the reporting of a station's main studio. 
We believe this information will help members of the public to engage 
in an active dialogue with broadcast licensees regarding its service, 
which is one of the goals of this proceeding, and will also assist in 
the identification of broadcasters that are engaging in shared services 
arrangements. We therefore propose that in the Commission-maintained 
online public file, the station's main studio address and telephone 
number be displayed. For stations with a main studio waiver, we propose 
that the location of the local file and the required toll free number 
should be listed. We seek comment on this proposal, as well as whether 
we should require the posting of an email address that will serve as a 
station contact for the public file.
    30. Sponsorship Identifications. Section 317 of the Communications 
Act requires that broadcasters disclose to their listeners or viewers 
if a matter has been aired in exchange for money, services, or other 
valuable consideration. The Commission's sponsorship identification 
rules currently require that stations provide an on-air disclosure when 
content is paid for, furnished, or sponsored by an outside party. The 
INC Report discussed examples of ``pay-for-play'' arrangements at local 
TV stations, where ``advertisers have been allowed to dictate, shape or 
sculpt news or editorial content.'' The INC Report expressed concern 
that this practice could have negative implications for the community's 
trust in local TV. The INC Report recommended that the Commission 
require that the on-air disclosures for such ``pay-for-play'' 
arrangements, which are already required to be disclosed on-air, be 
available online, perhaps as part of the public file, in order to 
create a permanent, searchable record of which stations use these 
arrangements and to afford easy access by consumers and watchdog groups 
to this information. PIPAC has recently recommended that, when a 
broadcaster airs news or information programming that would require an 
on-air disclosure of a sponsor under the FCC sponsorship identification 
rules, the licensee should also post that information in its online 
public file.
    31. With the exception of sponsored political advertising and 
certain issue advertising, the Commission only requires that the 
sponsorship identification announcement occur once

[[Page 72153]]

during the programming and remain on the screen long enough to be read 
or heard by an average viewer.\20\ Section 317 requires stations to 
announce sponsorship information during the programming, and the 
implementing rule has long had an additional public file recordkeeping 
component for political and controversial issue announcements.\21\ The 
Commission has explained that such recordkeeping furthers the rule's 
underlying purpose. Given the fleeting nature of all disclosures, we 
believe it would also be useful to include such on-air disclosures in 
television broadcasters' online public file obligations, by requiring 
stations to list such sponsors in their online public file. Requiring a 
list of sponsors will create an accessible record of such sponsorships, 
and will allow interested parties to keep track of the number and 
extent of such sponsorships. We believe that such a list will further a 
central principle of the rule, which is that ``listeners are entitled 
to know by whom they are being persuaded.'' We seek comment on this 
proposal, and on our authority to impose such a requirement. We also 
seek input on how burdensome this requirement would be for 
broadcasters. This information must already be collected and disclosed 
on the air. What additional burden would be involved in listing the 
sponsors of such disclosures in the online public file? While the INC 
Report only suggests the online disclosure of sponsorship 
identification of news programming, we do not propose to limit 
disclosure to certain types of programming, but to include all 
sponsorships that require a special on-air disclosure. However, 
sponsorship identification announcements which are exempted under 
current rules, such as in situations involving commercial product 
advertisements where it's clear that the product is a sponsorship, will 
not need to be included in the online disclosures. We are only 
proposing to make disclosures currently required by section 317 and our 
rules more accessible. We seek comment on this proposal, including how 
long broadcasters should be required to retain this information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Political broadcast matter or any broadcast matter 
involving the discussion of a controversial issue of public 
importance longer than five minutes ``for which any film, record, 
transcription, talent, script, or other material or service of any 
kind is furnished * * * to a station as inducement for the 
broadcasting of such matter'' requires a sponsorship identification 
announcement both at the beginning and the conclusion of the 
broadcast programming containing the announcement. 47 CFR 
73.1212(d).
    \21\ 47 U.S.C. 317(a)(1); 47 CFR 73.1212(e). See also KGVO 
Broadcasting Inc., 9 FCC Rcd 6396 (1994). Section 315(e) of the Act 
includes a similar requirement to place a list of executives of a 
sponsoring entity in the political file for certain political 
matter. 47 U.S.C. 315(e)(2)(G). This matter includes, among other 
things, a national legislative issue of public importance. See 47 
U.S.C. 315(e)(1)(B)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    32. Sharing Agreements. PIPAC has recently recommended that sharing 
agreements among licensees, such as local news sharing and shared 
services agreements, should be available in the public file. Sharing 
agreements are contracts between licensees where one licensee provides 
certain station-related services to another station, including 
administrative, sales, and/or programming support, in order to obtain 
certain efficiencies.\22\ PIPAC notes that the INC Report found that 
some stations are outsourcing their news production or engaging in 
other forms of cooperative newsgathering. PIPAC argues that unless such 
agreements are available online it will be extremely difficult for 
members of the public, or the Commission, to learn about such 
agreements, which affect control of the station and production of local 
news and other programming. We note that the Commission already 
requires the disclosure of certain sharing agreements, such as time 
brokerage and joint sales agreements. We seek comment on whether 
disclosure of these similar agreements would serve the public interest, 
and whether stations should be required to disclose such items in their 
online public file. We seek comment on whether such agreements should 
be subject to the same redaction allowances that are made available to 
joint sales agreements and time brokerage agreements. We also seek 
comments on the burdens of adopting such a requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Some sharing agreements can affect at the Commission's 
attribution rules, which define what interests are counted for 
purposes of applying the Commission's broadcast ownership rules. See 
generally 47 CFR 73.3555.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Format
    33. The INC Report finds that information ``needs to be put out in 
standardized, machine-readable, structured formats that make it easy 
for programmers to create new applications that can present the data in 
more useful formats, or combine one agency's information with 
another,'' and that ``data releases should include an Application 
Programming Interface (API) that allows the data to be shared easily 
with other computers and applications.'' With respect to broadcasters' 
public files in particular, the INC Report states that ``[o]nline 
disclosure should be done according to the principles advocated by 
experts on transparency: in standardized, machine readable and 
structured formats.''
    34. We agree that some of the information in the public file would 
be of much greater benefit to the public if made available in a 
structured or database-friendly format that can be aggregated, 
manipulated, and more easily analyzed. That is our ultimate goal. We 
recognize, however, that converting the files to this format will take 
time and money. We tentatively conclude that we should not delay the 
benefits of having the public file available online, and therefore 
propose to not require broadcasters to alter the form of documents 
already in existence prior to posting them to the online public file at 
this time. However, we seek comment here on issues we should consider 
in the implementation of such an advanced database. Would the 
investment and effort to establish a searchable database yield 
improvement from simply having the broadcasters post the documents 
online in their current format? What steps would need to be taken in 
order to ensure the uploading of searchable documents by the 
broadcasters could be accomplished in a non-burdensome way? We believe 
that further consideration of the issue may lead to creation of more 
useful tools to analyze the information produced in the online public 
file. We seek comment, however, on whether broadcasters should be 
required to upload any electronic documents in their existing format to 
the extent feasible. For example, to the extent that a required filing 
already exists in a searchable format--such as Microsoft Word ``.doc'' 
format or non-copy protect text-searchable ``pdf'' format for text 
filings, or ``native formats'' such as spreadsheets in Microsoft 
``.xml'' format for non-text filings--should broadcasters be expected 
to upload the filing in that format to the extent technically feasible? 
We believe that requiring broadcasters to do so could increase 
usability and facilitate text searches. Should we require that 
documents created after the effective date of rules adopted in this 
proceeding be posted in a searchable format? Would such a requirement 
be unduly burdensome? To the extent documents are filed in a non-
searchable format, should the Commission digitize the documents and 
perform optical character recognition (``OCR'')? Given that native and 
primary electronic formats are more reliable than OCR, we believe that 
it will be in every station's best interests to provide documents in 
native and primary electronic formats to the extent feasible.

[[Page 72154]]

    35. We also seek comment on what metadata should be made available 
in the online public file. Should users be able to access when each 
item was uploaded to the file? Should we also make available metadata 
about who uploaded the item? Are there concerns about metadata 
disclosures for confidential or privileged information? If so, what 
steps should the Commission and stations take to manage these concerns?

B. Announcements and Links

    36. In the 2007 Report and Order, the Commission determined that 
viewers should be notified of the existence, location, and 
accessibility of the station's public file, as this would increase 
viewer awareness and help promote the ongoing dialogue between a 
station and the viewers it is licensed to serve. Therefore, the 
Commission required that licensees provide such notice on-air twice 
daily during the regular station identification announcements required 
under our rules, with at least one announcement to be aired between 6 
p.m. and midnight. Reconsideration petitioners argued that twice daily 
announcements were excessive. Public television stations argued that 
television station identifications are very limited in length, and that 
the Report and Order did not provide a reason for changing course from 
the tentative conclusion made in the NPRM that the Commission should 
not require announcements. They proposed that the Commission reduce 
this requirement to a few times a week, at most.
    37. We continue to believe that viewers should be notified of the 
existence, location, and accessibility of the station's public file; if 
most viewers are unaware of the existence of the public file or how to 
access it, its usefulness will be greatly diminished. We seek comment 
on how best to achieve this goal. Would requiring on-air announcements 
a few times a week be sufficient? Should we dictate day part 
requirements for certain announcements to be sure a large number of 
viewers are reached? We propose that stations be required to announce 
the existence, location, and accessibility of the station's public file 
three times a week as part of the station identification. We also 
propose that the notice state that the station's public file is 
available for inspection and that consumers can view it at the 
Commission's Web site, and that at least one of the announcements must 
occur between the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight. We seek comment on 
these proposals.
    38. PIPAC proposes that a link to the online public file appear on 
a broadcaster's home page, along with contact information for people 
with disabilities to use if they have concerns. They note that for a 
person with disabilities already struggling with an inaccessible site, 
the burden of searching through several pages or levels becomes an 
insurmountable barrier. We tentatively agree that stations that have 
Web sites should be required to place a link to the public file on 
their home page, not just to assist the disabled community, but to 
assist all members of the public who are looking for more information 
about a licensee. We seek comment on PIPAC's proposal that stations 
also list on their home page contact information for people with 
disabilities. What types of contact information would be most useful?

C. Radio

    39. Given this proceeding's genesis in the DTV transition, the 
Report and Order was limited to television stations. The Commission 
later sought comment on implementing an online public file requirement 
for analog and digital radio stations in the Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in the Digital Audio Broadcasting proceeding.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems and Their Impact on 
the Terrestrial Radio Broadcast Service, Second Report and Order, 
First Order on Reconsideration and Second Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 10344, 10391 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. This FNPRM, like all other items in this docket, is directed 
toward television broadcasters. We may consider requiring radio 
licensees to abide by similar reforms to their public file requirements 
at a later date. We believe, however, that there are benefits to 
requiring television licensees to implement enhanced disclosure 
requirements first. Television stations have been significantly more 
involved in considering these issues, from the NOI in 1999 through the 
2007 Report and Order. Further, it may ease the initial implementation 
of a Commission-hosted online public file if we begin the process with 
the much smaller number of television licensees than with all 
broadcasters. Finally, we foresee that there may be some radio-specific 
concerns that we will need to address prior to implementing an online 
public file requirement on radio stations. We thus tentatively conclude 
not to include radio licensees in this proceeding.

IV. Cost/Benefit Analysis

    41. In proposing rules to ensure that the public has adequate 
access to information about how broadcasters are serving their 
communities, we intend to look at the many factors involved in 
effective enhanced disclosure. This will ensure that the rules serve 
their intended purpose without posing an undue burden on industry. 
There are two key criteria for the success of such an approach.
    42. First, acknowledging the potential difficulty of quantifying 
benefits and burdens, we need to determine whether the proposed 
disclosure rules will significantly benefit the public. Second, we seek 
to maximize the benefits to the public from our proposed rules while 
taking into consideration the burden of compliance on broadcasters. 
These costs and benefits can have many dimensions, including cost 
implications for industry, public interest benefits to viewers, and 
other less tangible benefits.
    43. To address the first criterion, we seek comment on the best 
ways to ensure that the forms of disclosure discussed in this FNPRM 
will actually benefit the public. While most of the information to be 
included in the online public file is largely the same as information 
already being provided in the paper file, we seek comment on the value 
and use of the potential items to be added to the online public file, 
as discussed above. Further, we seek comment on any considerations 
regarding the manner in which our proposals could be implemented that 
would increase the number of people who will benefit from such rules, 
and the nature of these benefits. In particular, we seek comment on the 
best ways to ensure that information is more readily accessible to the 
public. While we believe that the proposed rules will increase its 
accessibility, by replacing the paper version of the public file with 
an online version, we seek further suggestions for increasing 
accessibility.
    44. To address the second criterion, we seek comment on the nature 
and magnitude of the costs and benefits of our new streamlined 
proposals. We recognize that these may vary by broadcaster, and seek 
comment on possible differential impacts, including size and type of 
broadcaster. We seek specific information about whether, how, and by 
how much broadcasters may be impacted differently in terms of the costs 
and benefits of our proposed rules. We also seek comment on the most 
cost-effective approach for modifying existing policies and practices 
to achieve the goals of this proceeding.
    45. To the extent possible, we request comment that will enable us 
to balance the positive benefits of these proposed disclosure rules 
with the costs that they may impose on broadcasters. We

[[Page 72155]]

recognize that costs and benefits will vary depending on the specific 
documents and format we require broadcasters to submit for inclusion in 
an online public file to be hosted by the Commission. A rule that 
documents may be uploaded in any format will likely impose minimal 
burdens on broadcasters as compared to a requirement that only 
documents in standardized formats will be accepted, as at least some 
broadcasters may need to recreate or reformat their documents prior to 
submission. The benefit the public reaps from access to information 
about how broadcasters are serving their communities will similarly 
vary depending on the specific documents and formats we require 
broadcasters to submit. Information that is submitted in non-
standardized formats will be useful to members of the public who are 
interested in only one or a few television stations. Researchers, 
however, need access to standardized data that are aggregable and 
searchable in order for the data to be useful in their analyses of 
industry performance. We request that commenters provide specific data 
and information, such as actual or estimated dollar figures for each 
specific cost or benefit addressed, including a description of how the 
data or information was calculated or obtained and any supporting 
documentation or other evidentiary support. All comments will be 
considered and given appropriate weight. Vague or unsupported 
assertions regarding costs or benefits generally can be expected to 
receive less weight and be less persuasive than more specific and 
supported statements.

A. Online Public File

    46. While it may be difficult to quantify the benefits of an online 
public file requirement, we seek comment on ways to do so. Is there a 
way to quantify the value of improving the quality of information 
presented to consumers? We also seek comment on the costs, which should 
be much more quantifiable. We received cost data from the commenters 
and petitioners in response to the NPRM and discussed them in the 
Report and Order. Given the technological advances since these 
estimates were created, the fact that the Commission is contemplating 
becoming the host of the online public file requirement, and that we 
are proposing to modify the required materials to be posted to the 
file, we seek updated cost estimates. Because most of the items that we 
are seeking to include in the online public file are already available 
in an electronic format, and because we are proposing to largely 
eliminate the paper public file, we believe that the costs of uploading 
these files to the online public file will be less burdensome than 
originally anticipated.
    47. We seek to weigh the costs of an online public file requirement 
against the benefits to the public of Internet accessibility of the 
information. It is beneficial for the community to have Internet access 
to information it may not otherwise be able to obtain. Making 
information available in the online public file will educate consumers 
on issues that they might not otherwise know about, absent an ability 
to visit a station to inspect the public file, and will assist 
consumers in educating themselves about the licensee and its 
programming. Making this information readily accessible will also 
assist the Commission and Congress in formulating public policy about 
broadcasting and other media issues. As discussed in previous Orders, 
the Commission has found that each of the items required to be placed 
in the public file is important, and needs to be accessible to the 
public. Internet access to such information improves public access and 
reduces some burdens on broadcasters. As discussed throughout the 
FNPRM, we seek comment on further ways to relieve burdens on 
broadcasters in creating the online public file requirement. Should we 
consider creating different requirements for small television 
broadcasters?

B. Announcements

    48. Finally, we seek to quantify the costs and benefits associated 
with notifying the public of the existence, location, and accessibility 
of the station's public file. The benefits of such a requirement, 
increasing viewer awareness and helping promote the ongoing dialogue 
between a station and the viewers they are licensed to serve, are 
difficult to quantify, but we seek comment on how to do so. We also 
seek comment on the projected costs of such announcements. Would 
requiring three announcements a week be a justifiable burden on 
broadcasters? Is the amount of the burden affected by the time of day 
that the announcement is made?

V. Procedural Matters

A. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    49. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (``RFA''), the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') concerning the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules 
proposed in the FNRPM Written public comments are requested on this 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be 
filed by the deadlines for comments. The Commission will send a copy of 
the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration (``SBA''). In addition, the FNPRM and 
IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rule Changes
    50. One of a television broadcaster's fundamental public interest 
obligations is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests 
of its community of license. Broadcasters are afforded considerable 
flexibility in how they meet that obligation. Among other things, they 
are required to maintain a public inspection file, which gives the 
public access to information about the station's operations. The FNPRM 
seeks to make information regarding how a television broadcast station 
serves the public interest easier to understand and more accessible.
    51. The FNPRM seeks comment on rule changes that would:
     Replace the requirement that television stations maintain 
a paper public file at their main studios with a requirement to submit 
documents for inclusion in an online public file, including the 
political file, to be hosted by the Commission;
     Reduce the number of documents that television stations 
would be required to upload to an online public file, by automatically 
linking to information already collected by the Commission;
     Streamline the information required to be kept in the 
file, such as by excluding letters and emails from the public;
     Require that sponsorship identification, now disclosed 
only on-air, should also be disclosed online, and require disclosure of 
online shared services agreements; and
     Make the online public file standardized and searchable, 
further improving the usefulness of the data.
2. Legal Basis
    52. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2, 
4(i), 303, and 405 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 
154(i), 303, and 405.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
    53. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by

[[Page 72156]]

the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA. Below, we 
provide a description of such small entities, as well as an estimate of 
the number of such small entities, where feasible.
    54. Television Broadcasting. The SBA defines a television 
broadcasting station as a small business if such station has no more 
than $14.0 million in annual receipts. Business concerns included in 
this industry are those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting images 
together with sound.'' \24\ The Commission has estimated the number of 
licensed commercial television stations to be 1,390. According to 
Commission staff review of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro 
Television Database (BIA) as of January 31, 2011, 1,006 (or about 78 
percent) of an estimated 1,298 commercial television stations in the 
United States have revenues of $14 million or less and, thus, qualify 
as small entities under the SBA definition. The Commission has 
estimated the number of licensed noncommercial educational (``NCE'') 
television stations to be 391. We note, however, that, in assessing 
whether a business concern qualifies as small under the above 
definition, business (control) affiliations must be included. Our 
estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of small entities 
that might be affected by our action, because the revenue figure on 
which it is based does not include or aggregate revenues from 
affiliated companies. The Commission does not compile and otherwise 
does not have access to information on the revenue of NCE stations that 
would permit it to determine how many such stations would qualify as 
small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id. This category description continues, ``These 
establishments operate television broadcasting studios and 
facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the 
public. These establishments also produce or transmit visual 
programming to affiliated broadcast television stations, which in 
turn broadcast the programs to the public on a predetermined 
schedule. Programming may originate in their own studios, from an 
affiliated network, or from external sources.'' Separate census 
categories pertain to businesses primarily engaged in producing 
programming. See Motion Picture and Video Production, NAICS code 
512110; Motion Picture and Video Distribution, NAICS Code 512120; 
Teleproduction and Other Post-Production Services, NAICS Code 
512191; and Other Motion Picture and Video Industries, NAICS Code 
512199.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    55. In addition, an element of the definition of ``small business'' 
is that the entity not be dominant in its field of operation. We are 
unable at this time to define or quantify the criteria that would 
establish whether a specific television station is dominant in its 
field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses to 
which rules may apply do not exclude any television station from the 
definition of a small business on this basis and are therefore over-
inclusive to that extent. Also, as noted, an additional element of the 
definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must be 
independently owned and operated. We note that it is difficult at times 
to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and our 
estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive 
to this extent.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements
    56. Certain rule changes proposed in the FNPRM would affect 
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. Television 
broadcasters are currently required to maintain a copy of their public 
inspection files at their main studios. The FNPRM proposes to replace 
that requirement with a requirement to submit documents for inclusion 
in an online public file, including the political file, to be hosted on 
the Commission's Web site. Items in the public file that must also be 
filed with the Commission, including FCC authorizations, applications 
and related materials, contour maps, ownership reports and related 
materials, portions of the equal employment opportunity file, the 
public and broadcasting manual, children's television programming 
reports (Form 398), and DTV transition education reports (Form 388), 
will be automatically imported into the station's online public file. 
Television stations will only be responsible for uploading and 
maintaining items that are not required to be filed with the Commission 
under any other rule. The FNPRM also proposes to exclude some items 
from the online public file requirement, such as letters and emails 
from the public, and proposes to add other items to the online public 
file requirement, such as whether sponsorship identification, now 
disclosed only on-air, should also be disclosed online, and whether to 
require disclosure of online shared services agreements.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    57. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small 
entities.
    58. The FNPRM seeks to minimize reporting requirements on all 
television broadcasters, by having the Commission host the online 
public file. The previous Report and Order in this proceeding, which 
has been vacated, required stations to host their own public file. 
Having the Commission host the public file will ease the administrative 
burdens on all broadcasters. More than a third of the required contents 
of the public file have to be filed with the Commission, and the FNPRM 
proposes to import and update information that must already be filed 
with the Commission automatically, creating efficiencies for 
broadcasters. Accordingly, since no significant economic impact is 
imposed by the proposed rules on small entities, no discussion of 
alternatives is warranted.
    59. Overall, in proposing rules governing an online public file 
requirement, we believe that we have appropriately balanced the 
interests of the public against the interests of the entities who will 
be subject to the rules, including those that are smaller entities.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule
    60. None.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    61. This document contains proposed information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business 
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we seek specific comment on how we

[[Page 72157]]

might ``further reduce the information collection burden for small 
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''

C. Ex Parte Rules

    62. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding will be treated as a 
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding subject to the Commission's ex parte 
rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any 
written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation 
within two business days after the presentation (unless a different 
deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making 
oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the 
presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise 
participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was 
made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during 
the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of 
the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the 
presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the 
proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or 
arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings 
(specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data 
or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the 
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex 
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must 
be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 
rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of 
electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda 
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, 
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available 
for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., 
.doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding 
should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.

D. Filing Requirements

    63. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of 
the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (``ECFS'').
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial 
overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service 
mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    [cir] All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for 
the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 
12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 
8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber 
bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering 
the building.
    [cir] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    [cir] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington DC 20554.
    64. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex 
parte submissions will be available for public inspection during 
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington, 
DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents 
will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe 
Acrobat.
    65. Accessibility Information. To request information in accessible 
formats (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an 
email to [email protected] or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    66. Additional Information. For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Holly Saurer of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, 
(202) 418-7283, or via email at [email protected].

VI. Ordering Clauses

    67. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, and 307 of the Communications 
Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, and 307, this Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
    68. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 73

    Television.

Federal Communications Commission
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 part 73 as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

    1. The Authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 and 339.

    2. Section 73.1201 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  73.1201  Station identification.

* * * * *
    (b)
* * * * *
    (3) Three times a week, the station identification for television 
stations must include a notice stating that the station's public file 
is available for viewing at the FCC's Web site. At least one of the 
announcements must occur between the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight.
    3. Section 73.1212 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.1212  Sponsorship Identification; list retention; related 
requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) The announcement required by this section shall, in addition to 
stating the fact that the broadcast matter was sponsored, paid for or 
furnished, fully and fairly disclose the true identity of the person or 
persons, or corporation, committee, association or other unincorporated 
group, or other entity by whom or on whose behalf such payment is made 
or promised, or from whom or on whose behalf such services or other 
valuable consideration is received, or by whom the material or services 
referred

[[Page 72158]]

to in paragraph (d) of this section are furnished. Where an agent or 
other person or entity contracts or otherwise makes arrangements with a 
station on behalf of another, and such fact is known or by the exercise 
of reasonable diligence, as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, 
could be known to the station, the announcement shall disclose the 
identity of the person or persons or entity on whose behalf such agent 
is acting instead of the name of such agent. Where the material 
broadcast is political matter or matter involving the discussion of a 
controversial issue of public importance and a corporation, committee, 
association or other unincorporated group, or other entity is paying 
for or furnishing the broadcast matter, the station shall, in addition 
to making the announcement required by this section, require that a 
list of the chief executive officers or members of the executive 
committee or of the board of directors of the corporation, committee, 
association or other unincorporated group, or other entity shall be 
made available for public inspection at the location specified under 
Sec.  73.3526. If the broadcast is originated by a network, the list 
may, instead, be retained at the headquarters office of the network or 
at the location where the originating station maintains its public 
inspection file under Sec.  73.3526. Such lists shall be kept and made 
available for a period of two years.
* * * * *
    4. Section 73.1943 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.1943  Political file.

* * * * *
    (d) Location of the file. A television station licensee or 
applicant must also place all of the contents of its political file on 
the Commission's Web site. This electronic political file must be 
updated in the same manner as paragraph (c) of this section.
    5. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding 
paragraphs (e)(18) and (e)(19) to read as follows:


Sec.  73.3526  Local public inspection file of commercial stations.

* * * * *
    (b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be 
located as follows:
    (1) For radio licensees, a hard copy of the public inspection file 
shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. For television 
licensees, letters and emails from the public, as required by paragraph 
(e)(9) of this section, shall be maintained at the main studio of the 
station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall 
maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of 
license or at its proposed main studio.
    (2) A television station licensee or applicant shall place the 
contents of its public inspection file required by paragraph (e) of 
this section on the Commission's Web site, with the exception of 
letters and emails from the public as required by paragraph (e)(9) of 
this section, which will be retained at the station in the manner 
discussed in paragraph (1) of this section. A station must link to the 
public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the 
home page of its own Web site, if the station has a Web site.
    (3) The Commission will automatically link the following items to 
the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection 
files, to the extent that the Commission has these items 
electronically: Authorizations, applications, contour maps; ownership 
reports and related materials; portions of the Equal Employment 
Opportunity file held by the Commission; the public and broadcasting; 
Children's television programming reports; and DTV transition education 
reports. In the event that the online public file does not reflect such 
required information, the licensee will be responsible for posting such 
material.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (18) Sharing agreements. For commercial television stations, a copy 
of every agreement or contract involving sharing agreements for the 
station, including local news sharing agreements and shared services 
agreements, whether the agreement involves stations in the same markets 
or in differing markets, with confidential or proprietary information 
redacted where appropriate.
    (19) Sponsorship identifications. For commercial television 
stations, a list of all sponsorship identifications that must be 
announced on-air pursuant to 47 CFR 73.1212.
* * * * *
    6. Section 73.3527 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.3527  Local public inspection file of noncommercial 
educational stations.

* * * * *
    (b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be 
located as follows:
    (1) For radio licensees, a hard copy of the public inspection file 
shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. For television 
licensees, letters and emails from the public, as required by paragraph 
(e)(9) of this section, shall be maintained at the main studio of the 
station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall 
maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of 
license or at its proposed main studio.
    (2) A television station licensee or applicant shall place the 
contents of its public inspection file on the Commission's Web site, 
with the exception of letters and emails from the public, which will be 
retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (1) of 
this section. A station must link to the public inspection file hosted 
on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if 
the station has a Web site.
    (3) The Commission will automatically link the following items to 
the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection 
files, to the extent that the Commission has these items 
electronically: Contour maps; ownership reports and related materials; 
portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file held by the 
Commission; and the public and broadcasting.


[FR Doc. 2011-30009 Filed 11-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P