[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38331-38335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15166]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[MB Docket No. 09-182; MB Docket No. 07-294; DA-13-1317]


Media Bureau Invites Comments on Study Submitted by the Minority 
Media and Telecommunications Council in 2010 Quadrennial Review of 
Broadcast Ownership Rules

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document seeks comment on a May 30, 2013, study from the 
Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC) titled The Impact 
of Cross Media Ownership on Minority/Women Owned Broadcast Stations 
(the Study) in the above referenced dockets.

DATES: Interested parties may file comments on or before July 22, 2013, 
and reply comments on or before August 6, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin Arden, Media Bureau, at (202) 
418-2330 or email at [email protected], or Brendan Holland, Media 
Bureau, at (202) 418-2330 or email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The complete text of the document is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, 
and may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, BCPI, 
Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20054. Customers 
may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site http://www.bcpi.com or call 1-
800-378-3160.

Summary of the Public Notice

    1. On May 30, 2013, the Minority Media and Telecommunications 
Council (MMTC) submitted a study by Fratrik, Dr. Mark R., Vice 
President and Chief Economist, BIA/Kelsey, entitled The Impact of Cross 
Media Ownership on Minority/Women Owned Broadcast Stations (the Study) 
in the above-referenced dockets. According to MMTC, the Study examines 
whether, and to what extent, cross-ownership might have a material 
adverse impact on minority and women ownership of commercial broadcast 
stations. MMTC suggests that the Commission seek public comment 
regarding the extent to which the Study may or should be relied on by 
the Commission in the ongoing media ownership and diversity 
proceedings.
    2. The Media Bureau invites public comment on the Study from 
interested parties. The complete text of the Study dated May 30, 2013, 
is as follows:

The Impact of Cross Media Ownership on Minority/Women Owned Broadcast 
Stations

    Mark R. Fratrik, Ph.D., Vice President, Chief Economist, BIA/Kelsey 
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This report was underwritten by a grant from the Minority 
Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC). The author is 
appreciative of the survey design and evaluation guidance received 
from MMTC's volunteer peer reviewers--Dr. Jannette Dates, Dean 
Emerita, School of Communications, Howard University; Dr. Philip 
Napoli, Professor of Communication and Media Management at the 
Fordham Schools of Business and Director of the university's Donald 
McGannon Communication Research Center; and Allen Hammond, Esq., 
Associate Dean for Faculty Development, Phil and Bobbie Sanfilippo 
Chair and Professor of Law, and Director of the Broadband Institute 
of California, Santa Clara University School of Law.

May 30, 2013

                         Table of Contents
Executive Summary..................................................    i
Introduction.......................................................    1
Procedure..........................................................    2
Results............................................................    5
Competition in the Local Market....................................    5
Provision of News and Information and Challenges...................    8
Conclusion.........................................................    9
Appendix A--Survey Questionnaire...................................   12
 

The Impact of Cross Media Ownership on Minority/Women Owned Broadcast 
Stations

Executive Summary

    3. The marketplace in which local radio and television stations, as 
well as local newspapers has changed quite dramatically in the past few 
years. Competition for audiences as well as for local advertisers has 
noticeably increased. At the same time, these traditional media are 
still important players in the advertising marketplace and the 
provision of news and entertainment to their local communities.
    4. The regulations governing the ownership of these traditional 
media have changed too, though the ban on broadcast-newspaper local 
ownership is still in place. Many analysts have examined the 
continuance of that ban and relaxing other local broadcast ownership 
rules on the impact on competition and the provision of diverse 
viewpoints. There has not been any specific study on the impact of 
relaxing these local cross-ownership rules on the impact on minority 
and/or women owned broadcasters.
    5. In this study we focus in on that research question--whether the 
existence of a commonly owned cross-media operation has a disparate 
impact on minority and/or women owned broadcast stations. Specifically, 
we surveyed both minority and/or women owned broadcast stations in 
markets with cross-media operations along with non-minority/non-women 
owned broadcast stations in the same markets. In that survey we asked 
respondents in several different ways to offer their views on the 
importance of these local cross-media operations. We wanted to see if 
there was a difference in the responses of the two groups of stations 
of these cross-media operations.

[[Page 38332]]

    6. While we would have preferred to have received more responses, 
we believe that the responses that we did receive indicated there is no 
difference in the views of the two groups of stations towards the 
impact of these cross-media operations. We were struck by the lack of 
any large concern by almost all of the respondents to these cross-media 
operations. Several times in the questionnaire we provided 
opportunities for the responding stations in both groups to offer those 
operations as answers. What was provided as answers are general 
business concerns that all radio and television stations have in all 
markets--strong broadcast station competitors especially in the genre 
of programming they provide and the emergence of new competitors from 
new sources. The only responses expressed regarding the impact of 
cross-media combinations were expressed by all three respondents in a 
medium market in which the daily newspaper is affiliated with a full 
power television station and local radio stations.
    7. There may be sound justifications relating to overall viewpoint 
diversity, localism, or competition for why the cross-ownership rules 
should or should not be changed. However, it appears from this study 
that cross-media interests' impact on minority and women broadcast 
ownership is not sufficiently material to be a material justification 
for tightening or retaining the rules.

The Impact of Cross Media Ownership on Minority/Women Owned Broadcast 
Stations

Introduction

    8. Today's media marketplace is noticeably different than it was 
forty years ago. Consumers have access to many different sources of 
information and entertainment. Advertisers have many different options 
to reach their potential customers with their advertising messages. 
Included in those choices for both consumers and advertisers are local 
radio and television stations and daily and weekly newspapers. These 
local broadcast stations and newspapers still are important components 
of providing program and informational diversity.
    9. During these last forty years, the prohibitions on the ownership 
of locally owned daily newspapers and local broadcast stations have 
remained in place, and some limited restrictions on ownership of local 
radio and television stations are also still in place. Yet, due to 
grandfathering of certain local newspaper-broadcast and permissible 
local radio-television operations, there are several local commonly 
owned cross-media operations. The impact of these established local 
cross-media operations have been studied extensively in the debate on 
whether these cross-media restrictions should be left unchanged, 
tightened, relaxed or eliminated.
    10. One area that has not been studied as extensively has been the 
impact of these locally cross-media owned operations on other local 
stations owned by minority and/or women. One bedrock principle of 
communications policy has been to promote diverse ownership of 
broadcast stations to try to promote diversity in viewpoint and 
programming. If the impact of commonly owned local cross-media 
operations adversely and especially affects broadcast stations owned by 
minority and/or women, then relaxing these local ownership rules may 
have a negative impact on promoting diversity in ownership.
    11. In this study we attempted to begin to answer that question. 
Specifically, we tried to survey stations owned or formerly owned by 
minority and/or women in markets where there was a commonly owned local 
cross-media operation. Our research question was simply to determine 
whether there was a disparate impact on these women/minority stations, 
we also attempted to survey stations in those same markets that were 
not owned by minority or women. Questions were asked about the level of 
competition and the provision of news and information in these local 
markets.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The questionnaire is included in Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. Before discussing the actual results of the survey, it is 
important to highlight the limitations of this study's results. This 
study was not a comprehensive examination of all of the women and/or 
minority owned stations in all of the markets in which a commonly owned 
cross-media operation is present. Additionally, FCC and public interest 
groups' economists agree that the number of these instances is not 
large enough to conduct a random sample study to elicit generalizable 
results. On the other hand, what can be determined through this 
procedure is a reasonably clear sense of whether there is a material 
difference in the impact of these commonly owned local cross media 
operations. Of course, specific instances might be present that 
contradict these findings, but the results can provide some indications 
of whether there is an adverse or, especially, a disparate impact on 
these minority/women owned broadcasters.

Procedure

    13. In order to conduct the survey we first had to designate the 
women and/or minority owned broadcasters. The FCC has provided the 
race/gender ownership status of radio and television stations by 
station type (e.g., AM station). Utilizing those lists with the BIA/
Kelsey Media Access ProTM database of all broadcast stations 
and local daily newspapers, we were able to determine the individual 
markets in which all of these stations reside.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ BIA/Kelsey maintains a comprehensive database in its Media 
Access ProTM service of all commercial and noncommercial 
radio and television stations, as well as all daily and weekly 
newspapers. That database is updated daily to reflect personnel, 
technical, and ownership changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Once we determined the market in which these stations are 
located, we then determined using the Media Access ProTM 
database which stations are located in markets where a commonly owned 
cross-media operation exist. Minority and/or women owned stations were 
selected that were located in those markets in which there were either 
a commonly owned grandfathered radio/newspaper, grandfathered 
television/newspaper, or radio/television operation. Additional 
minority and/or women owned stations that were located in markets in 
which there were none of these commonly owned cross-media operations 
were also selected to act as a super-control group.
    15. In all of these markets--with or without a commonly owned 
cross-media operation--additional stations were selected that were not 
owned by a woman or minority to be contacted. Care was taken to select 
non-minority/non-women owned broadcast stations to reflect stations 
that are part of large broadcast groups and those that are not. With 
this non-minority/non-women owned group we could compare their 
responses with the responses of women and/or minority owned broadcast 
stations in the same market and see whether there was a material 
difference in the impact of the cross-media operations.
    16. These stations were initially individually contacted via email 
from the study's author alerting them of this study and that someone 
would be calling them to ask them questions concerning the 
competitiveness of their local radio or television market. Soon after 
that email those phone calls were made. To increase the number of 
responses, we subsequently sent an email with a link to an online 
survey questionnaire, with a promise of an online gift card if the 
survey was completed. All respondents were

[[Page 38333]]

guaranteed confidentiality of their responses and that we were only 
going to report on the general trends of all respondents.
    17. In total we obtained information from 14 local broadcast 
operations--13 of which represent 31 stations in those markets, along 
with information from a principal of a minority owned station that had 
exited a market in which there was a commonly-owned cross-media 
operation.\4\ More responses would have been preferred and repeated 
attempts were made to induce responses from all that were contacted. 
Nevertheless, we think that the information obtained from this group of 
14 respondents is sufficiently compelling and unambiguous to help 
answer the question of whether there is a disparate or adverse impact 
of commonly owned, local cross-media operations on minority or women 
owned broadcasters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Among the fourteen respondents, eight were from minority or 
women-owned companies and six were from nonminority-men owned 
companies. Among the eight respondents from minority or women-owned 
companies, five were from group owners, and four operated stations 
(within a group or otherwise) that were single stations in their 
markets. Among the six respondents from nonminority-men owned 
companies, three were from group owners, and one operated a station 
(within a group or otherwise) that was a single station in its 
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Included in the eight-question questionnaire were questions to 
elicit responses from the broadcast stations on which they felt were 
the most competitive (to them) radio or television stations in their 
local markets. Additionally, open ended questions on the important 
factors and challenges they face in selling advertising and providing 
local news and information were also asked. These general questions 
were purposely raised to see if the responding stations would cite the 
local commonly owned, cross-media operation in their answers. Further, 
we were curious to see if the respondents from minority and/or women 
owned stations would mention the commonly owned, cross-media operation 
more frequently in their responses to these questions than responses 
from the other group of stations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In the survey research literature this procedure is referred 
to unaided recall, allowing the respondent to offer those points 
without any prompting. If the respondents do cite these issues as 
important without any prompting, then one can easily conclude as to 
its importance. All of the respondents were general managers and 
thus may be assumed to be familiar, for unaided recall purposes, 
with the factors that might impact their stations' programming, 
operations and competitive success.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    19. To supplement the questions on present direct competitors, 
other questions were included to draw out these stations' perceptions 
on the changes in competition from possibly other sources. Finally, 
questions were asked on the provision of news and information and what 
challenges are faced in providing news and information. That last 
general question was asked to see if the stations felt that the 
presence of a cross-media operation made the provision of news and 
information more difficult, and whether there were any differences in 
the two sets of responding stations to the difficulty in providing news 
and information.

Results

Competition in the Local Market

Present Competitors
    20. The clear conclusion from the responses to the question of 
which stations are the most direct competitors we received is simply 
there was no difference in the responses from the minority and/or women 
owned stations and the other. There was one minority and/or women owned 
station and two non-minority/non-women owned stations that mentioned 
the local cross- media operation.\6\ All of the other responses 
mentioned other radio and television stations in their local markets, 
primarily stations that provide similar programming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The three minority and/or women and non-minority/non-women 
owned broadcast stations respondents citing the cross media 
operation were in a medium market in which there was a local 
combination of the only daily newspaper, a full power television 
station, and radio stations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. In identical fashion, the responses to the question of which 
local station is the dominant competitor in the market plainly 
indicates that there is no difference between the perceptions of the 
two groups of respondents. Once again, there was one minority and/or 
women owned station and two non-minority/non-women owned stations that 
mentioned the local cross-media operation. All other stations indicated 
a local group of radio stations or specific stations or even other 
media in their responses.
    22. Supporting that conclusion were the responses to two open-ended 
questions of the important factors and challenges they face in selling 
advertising in their local markets. None of the responses, either from 
the minority and/or women owned or the non-minority/non-women owned 
stations mentioned the presence of these cross-media operations, either 
directly or indirectly. The responses for these questions were very 
direct, mentioning the levels of competition within the media and from 
outside. Here are some of the specific responses to those open ended 
questions.
    23. What are the most important factors your station faces in 
regards to selling advertising time?
     Market conditions, pricing, ratings.
     The perception of radio.
     Awareness, we are the new kids on the block.
     It is a price war with television combining their digital 
tier stations with their main channel bringing the overall cost lower 
than radio. We also have to overcome the internet and satellite radio 
objections as competition for our audience.
     Ratings, competitors' rates, the overall health of the 
economy.
     Price. Audience.
     Audience reach.
     Other viable alternative outlets providing my audience.
     High sales department churn; Weak Local Sales Manager; 
Weak Sales Training.
     Managing inventory with minimal waste.
    24. What challenges do you face in selling advertising time in your 
local market?
     Current economic conditions with small business owners 
having enough advertising/marketing budget to achieve results for them.
     Retaining and hiring good qualified salespeople.
     Too much media/advertising available. There must be 100 
items selling as advertising.
     Slow economy and the lack of locally owned stores.
     Tighter budgets in the face of new platforms. Digital 
reduced spending by advertising and combating annual contracts.
     We need to educate our clients about our format; the other 
radio station in the market always dives on rates; our clients believe 
they get better value in print vs. radio.
     The economic conditions are shaky at best.
     Advertisers to look at our medium and value it 
accordingly; we are looked as an ``old medium''.
     Businesses are still reluctant to spend money, economy is 
still tight. Radio is very competitive in this market with a lot of 
stations fighting for a small piece of the pie.
Emerging Competitors
    25. Another question was asked on what emerging competitors do they 
see in their local market. Here again, we were providing an opportunity 
for the responding stations to mention the local cross-media operation. 
Additionally, we were seeing if there would be a

[[Page 38334]]

difference between the two groups of respondents on whether the cross-
media operations are thought of as emerging competitors.
    26. The responses once again show the lack of concern about the 
local cross media operation as an emerging competitor. Only one 
respondent, a non-minority/non-women owned station, mentioned one cross 
media operation. Most of the other responses mention online/digital 
media companies such as Facebook, Google, Pandora, Spotify, and 
``Digital platforms of all shapes and sizes.'' Two other respondents 
cited a new network being delivered through local television stations 
multicast signals, and another respondent mentioned another local 
television station.

Provision of News and Information and Challenges

    27. As mentioned earlier, questions on the present provision of and 
challenges in providing news and information were asked. Here again we 
were attempting to see if the presence of cross-media operations made 
it more difficult for local stations to effectively provide news and 
information and whether there was a difference in the two sets of 
responding stations.
    28. With respect to the number of minutes of news and information, 
the answers varied from a few music radio stations saying little or no 
minutes per hour to all news stations reporting that is their entire 
programming. Generally, most of the radio stations indicated some 
provision of news and information.
    29. When asked about the challenges facing the provision of news 
and information on their stations, none of the respondents indicated 
the local cross-media operation. Below are some of the responses to 
that open ended question.
    30. What challenges do you face when delivering news and 
information on your station?
     Our biggest challenge is the geographic makeup of our 
market, which is 75 miles north to south and east to west.
     Making it local.
     Competing with digital media to get the information first. 
Many more players on the digital front.
     Relative news but not too much news.
     Current information.
     Keeping viewer attention.
     Limited staff. (1) On-air talent and (1) producer-reporter 
affects our ability to cover ``breaking news''; currently evaluating/
considering eliminating local news programming due to limited budget 
resources.
     Personnel to cover the news with reduced staff sizes.
     Having appropriate staffing numbers to cover the market.
    31. Finally, we asked all respondents what competitive media 
outlets (both broadcast and non-broadcast) provide news and 
information. This question was asked to see if the local cross-media 
operation would be mentioned and whether the mentions of these 
operations were different for the two sets of responding stations. Only 
two stations, both non-minority/non-women owned stations, mentioned the 
local cross-media operation. All other respondents either mentioned 
specific radio and television stations or just a generic TV or Print. 
Two mentioned Yahoo as a local media outlet while another mentioned 
smartphones and tablets as a device to provide local news and 
information.

Conclusion

    32. As mentioned in the introduction, this study was not intended 
as a comprehensive random sample survey of all instances of local 
cross-media operations in markets with stations owned by minorities 
and/or women. Instead, it was an attempt to solicit information from 
some of those stations about the competitive nature of local markets 
and provision of news and information from minority and/or women owned 
stations in these markets, along with non-minority/non-women owned 
stations in these same markets. In trying to obtain that information 
from these two groups of stations, we were trying to see if there was a 
material difference between the two groups on the impact of the cross-
media operation.
    33. Given our limited number of responses, great care has to be 
taken in reaching any conclusions. Yet, we are struck by the lack of 
any large concern by almost all of the respondents to these cross-media 
operations. Several times in the questionnaire we provide opportunities 
for the responding stations in both groups to offer those operations as 
answers. What was provided as answers are general business concerns 
that all radio and television stations have in all markets--strong 
broadcast station competitors especially in the genre of programming 
they provide and the emergence of new competitors from new sources.
    34. This lack of mentions of local cross-media operations was also 
present in the questions concerning the provision of news and 
information. Answers were provided on other media outlets providing 
news and information involved strong stations within the local markets 
as well as generic answers of an entire media. Further, the answers to 
the challenges that the stations in both groups of respondents once 
again included general business concerns on providing programming that 
is compelling to watch and the emergence of new outlets providing such 
news and information.
    35. So, what we have gleaned from the responses we did receive to 
our survey is a concern about the competitive marketplace facing radio 
and television stations from stations that are providing similar types 
of programming, and other new types of media. There was little if any 
mention of the local cross-media operations, except in a medium market 
where the cross-media interests included the daily newspaper, and a 
full power TV station and radio stations. Finally, there was no 
perceptible difference in the responses of the two groups of 
respondents to these issues.
    36. The results of this study, while not dispositive, do provide 
evidence that the impact of cross-media ownership on minority and women 
broadcast ownership is probably negligible. This does not mean that the 
cross-media ownership rules should, or should not, be changed. There 
may be sound justifications relating to overall viewpoint diversity, 
localism, or competition why the rules should or should not be changed. 
However, it appears from this study that cross-media interests' impact 
on minority and women broadcast ownership is not sufficiently 
noticeable to station operators on the ground to be a material 
justification for tightening or retaining the rules.

Appendix A--Survey Questionnaire

Study on Impact of Cross-Media Owned Operations

    1. What are the radio stations in your market that you compete 
against most directly? (name all that seem appropriate)
    2. Besides other radio stations, what other media outlets in 
your market do you compete against?
    4. Who do you consider the dominant competitor in the local 
market?
    5. Who do you see as an emerging competitor in your local 
market?
    6. What challenges do you face in selling advertising time in 
your local market?
    7. How many minutes per hour or hours per day, on average 
Monday-Sunday, of local news do you estimate as providing on your 
station?
    8. What challenges do you face in providing news and information 
on your station?
    9. Who are the competitive local media outlets (both broadcast 
and non-broadcast) in providing news and information?


[[Page 38335]]


    37. Procedural Matters: In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the 
subject proceeding, the Commission established that the proceeding will 
be treated as ``permit but disclose'' for purposes of the Commission's 
ex parte rules.\7\ Thus, as a result of the permit-but-disclose status 
of this proceeding, ex parte presentations will be governed by the 
procedures set forth in Section 1.1206 of the Commission's rules 
applicable to non-restricted proceedings.\8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 47 CFR 1.1200, 1.1206; see also 2010 Quadrennial Regulatory 
Review--Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules & Other 
Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act 
of 1996 Promoting Diversification of Ownership in the Broadcast 
Services, MB Docket No. 09-182, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 26 
FCC Rcd 17489, 17570-71, ] 211 (2011).
    \8\ 47 CFR 1.1206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. Comment Information: Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of 
the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, 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: (1) The 
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal 
Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See 
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 
(1998).
    [ssquf] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    [ssquf] For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit 
an electronic comment by Internet email. To get filing instructions, 
filers should send an email to [email protected], and include the following 
words in the body of the message ``get form.'' A Sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
    [ssquf] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file 
an original and four copies 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.
    [ssquf] 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 
8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before 
entering the building.
    [ssquf] 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.
    [ssquf] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington DC 20554.
    [ssquf] People with Disabilities: To request materials in 
accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or 
call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 
(voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).

Federal Communications Commission.
Thomas Horan,
Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2013-15166 Filed 6-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P