[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21718-21722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09461]



[[Page 21718]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MB Docket No. 07-294, MD Docket No. 10-234; FCC 17-42]


Promoting Diversification of Ownership in the Broadcasting 
Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission expands the option to use 
Special Use FRNs on ownership reports for noncommercial educational 
broadcast stations (FCC Form 323-E). This action addresses several 
petitions for reconsideration of a prior Commission decision and 
properly balances the Commission's need to improve the integrity and 
usability of its broadcast ownership data with the concerns raised in 
the petitions for reconsideration.

DATES: Effective May 10, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Clark, Industry Analysis 
Division, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2330 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order 
on Reconsideration in MB Docket No. 07-294 and MD Docket No. 10-234; 
FCC 17-42, was adopted on April 20, 2017, and released on April 21, 
2017. The complete text of this document is available electronically 
via the search function on the FCC's Electronic Document Management 
System (EDOCS) Web page at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_pubilc/. The 
complete document is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street 
SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. 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 FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-
0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

Synopsis

    1. Background. Commercial and noncommercial broadcasters are 
required to submit ownership reports every two years and on other 
occasions specified in the Commission's rules. These reports must 
include information about the individuals and entities that hold 
attributable interests in the station licensee, including officers and 
directors. Commercial broadcasters submit ownership reports on FCC Form 
323, and noncommercial educational (NCE) broadcasters submit ownership 
reports on FCC Form 323-E.
    2. In the 323 and 323-E Order (81 FR 19431, Apr. 4, 2016, FCC 16-1, 
rel. Jan. 20, 2016), the Commission revised Forms 323 and 323-E to 
address issues with the Commission's data collection process that were 
identified previously by the United States Government Accountability 
Office (GAO), by researchers who wish to study the Commission's 
ownership data, and by the Third Circuit as part of its review of the 
Commission's Quadrennial Review proceeding. Among other things, the 323 
and 323-E Order revised Form 323-E to require that NCE filers provide a 
unique FCC Registration Number (FRN) generated by the Commission 
Registration System (CORES) for each attributable interest holder 
listed on Form 323-E, just as commercial broadcasters must do on Form 
323. Importantly, the 323 and 323-E Order also updated Form 323-E to 
collect information about the race, gender, and ethnicity of NCE 
attributable interest holders. These revisions addressed issues 
previously identified by GAO and harmonized Form 323-E with Form 323, 
which was revised in 2009 to collect such data.
    3. In response to concerns that mandatory use of a traditional 
CORES FRN on Forms 323 and 323-E would require submission of 
individuals' full social security numbers (SSNs) to the Commission, the 
323 and 323-E Order provided for a Restricted Use FRN (RUFRN) 
establishing an alternative means for obtaining a unique identifier for 
individual attributable interest holders that requires submission of an 
individual's full name, residential address, date of birth, and only 
the last four digits of his or her SSN. The applicant's name and CORES 
FRN/RUFRN are available publicly, but the underlying identifying 
information is stored confidentially within the CORES database. The 323 
and 323-E Order allowed filers to report Special Use FRNs (SUFRNs), 
which do not require submission of personal information, for 
attributable individuals, but only if the filer first used reasonable 
and good-faith efforts to obtain RUFRNs or CORES FRNs from such 
individuals, including informing the individual of the risk of 
enforcement action for failing to provide an RUFRN or CORES FRN or to 
permit an RUFRN or CORES FRN to be obtained on his or her behalf.
    4. Following the release of the 323 and 323-E Order, the American 
Public Media Group (APMG), the NCE Licensees, the Public Broadcasting 
Parties, and the State University of New York (SUNY) (together, the 
Petitioners) timely filed petitions for reconsideration (Petitions), 
Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding, 81 FR 
31223 (May 18, 2016). The Petitioners request that the Commission 
reconsider its decision to apply the CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement to 
Form 323-E.
    5. On January 4, 2017, the Media Bureau, acting on delegated 
authority, released the 323-E Order (DA 17-5, rel. Jan. 4, 2017), 
dismissing and denying the Petitions pursuant to section 1.429(l) of 
the Commission's rules. Subsequently, the Bureau set aside the 323-E 
Order pursuant to section 1.113 of the Commission's rules, concluding 
that it was more appropriate for the Petitions to be addressed at the 
Commission level. The Bureau returned the Petitions to pending status, 
stating that they would be considered by the Commission. Prior to the 
Bureau's action setting aside its 323-E Order, the NCE Licensees and 
the University of Michigan filed applications for review of the 323-E 
Order. Because the Bureau set aside the underlying order, we dismiss 
the applications for review as moot.
    6. Discussion. We find that the Petitioners and other NCEs 
participating in this proceeding have raised legitimate concerns that 
the CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement, and the prospect of enforcement action 
for failing to comply with this requirement, may hinder their efforts 
to recruit volunteers to serve on their licensee boards and pose other 
unique challenges. Unlike their counterparts in the commercial context 
and certain not-for-profit entities, NCE governing board members are, 
in many cases, unpaid volunteers. Because unpaid NCE board members 
receive no fee or other remuneration for their services, they lack the 
financial incentive to serve on boards that paid directors or board 
members have. Indeed, the record indicates that some public 
broadcasters have difficulty finding qualified, committed individuals 
to donate their time and attention to station governance.
    7. In the 323 and 323-E Order, the Commission affirmed its 
commitment to protecting the privacy and security of personally 
identifiable information that the Commission collects, and we re-affirm 
that commitment here. Contrary to the Institute for Public 
Representation (IPR)'s supposition, our action here does not presume 
that Commission databases

[[Page 21719]]

are insecure and that individuals who obtain a CORES FRN or RUFRN will 
expose themselves to identify theft, nor are such concerns the basis 
for the relief we grant today. However, we recognize that some NCE 
licensees may face unique circumstances with respect to their ability 
to recruit and retain qualified individuals to serve in governance 
positions.
    8. We share the Petitioners' concern that individuals who are 
reluctant to disclose personal information may then decline to serve as 
unpaid board members or, to the extent they are able to do so, those 
already serving as unpaid board members may resign rather than risk a 
Commission enforcement action for failure to provide the information 
needed to report a CORES FRN or RUFRN. Further, the Petitioners assert 
that many licensee board members--particularly those associated with 
colleges, universities, and state or local public broadcasting 
entities--are individuals chosen by public election or political 
appointment, or are ex officio members who serve by virtue of the 
public office they hold, such as Governor or State Superintendent of 
Education. The CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement and prospect of enforcement 
action could pose particular challenges in instances where a public 
official refuses to provide the information needed to obtain a CORES 
FRN or RUFRN but is unable to withdraw freely from the governing board.
    9. We find that the 323 and 323-E Order erred in rejecting the 
valid concerns raised by NCEs regarding the potential impact that the 
CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement, including the threat of possible 
enforcement action, could have in the NCE context. In discussing the 
availability of SUFRNs for both commercial and noncommercial ownership 
reports, the 323 and 323-E Order went so far as to state that the 
Commission may take enforcement action against the filer and/or the 
``recalcitrant individual'' in the event an SUFRN is used. As the 
Petitioners note, there is consensus among NCE commenters in this 
proceeding that requiring NCE filers to report CORES FRNs or RUFRNs for 
attributable individuals and inform such individuals about the risk of 
enforcement action could discourage volunteers from serving on the 
governing boards of NCE stations and pose unique challenges for board 
members who are politically elected or appointed. No commenter in this 
proceeding has disputed these assertions. The Petitioners contend that 
these assertions are based on the reactions of unpaid board members to 
the Commission's actions in this proceeding to date.
    10. The 323 and 323-E Order should have given more credence to the 
concerns raised by NCE broadcasters, particularly given their 
representations that these concerns were based on their experience with 
the day-to-day operations of their stations and interactions with 
volunteers serving on their governing boards. For example, in 
dismissing these assertions, the 323 and 323-E Order did not adequately 
consider claims that some noncommercial entities that hold commercial 
station licenses previously encountered difficulties when attempting to 
obtain similar identifying information from board members. Moreover, 
the 323 and 323-E Order did not adequately consider whether, when faced 
with the prospect of a Commission enforcement action against the 
individual interest holder, current or prospective board-member 
volunteers would decline to participate on the board.
    11. As noted above, no party opposed the petitions for 
reconsideration. Parties filing as UCC et al. submitted an ex parte 
filing belatedly arguing that concerns about the chilling effect of the 
FRN requirement are speculative. In effect, the ex parte is an untimely 
opposition to the petitions for reconsideration, and we reject it for 
that reason. Alternatively and independently, we reject this claim on 
the merits for the reasons set forth above.
    12. While use of unique identifiers improves the integrity and 
usability of the Commission's broadcast ownership data, we believe that 
the potential chilling effect on participation in NCE station 
governance, and the potentially deleterious effect that loss of NCE 
leaders could have on the noncommercial broadcast service to the 
public, outweigh this benefit in the NCE context. Commenters claim that 
difficulties retaining or attracting qualified individuals to serve in 
leadership positions will adversely affect station operations. 
Therefore, we conclude that the better course is to make reporting of 
CORES FRNs and RUFRNs optional for individuals who hold an attributable 
interest in an NCE station. Accordingly, NCE filers may report an SUFRN 
on Form 323-E for an attributable individual who has not obtained a 
CORES FRN or RUFRN at the time the filer submits its ownership report, 
without the need to first use reasonable and good-faith efforts to 
obtain the information needed to report a CORES FRN or RUFRN, including 
informing individuals about the threat of enforcement action.
    13. In the 323 and 323-E Order, the Commission noted that, in the 
limited cases where a non-profit entity holds a commercial license, the 
Commission will deem the filing of Form 323-E, in accordance with the 
standards set forth in the Order, compliant with the Commission's 
biennial filing obligation in those circumstances and the non-profit 
entity would not be required to file Form 323. Accordingly, we will 
deem the filing of Form 323-E, in accordance with the standards set 
forth herein and in the 323 and 323-E Order, compliant with our 
biennial reporting requirement where a non-profit entity holds a 
commercial license.
    14. We conclude that our action today will address the concerns 
raised by the Petitioners and NCE commenters in this proceeding. Unlike 
registering for a CORES FRN or RUFRN, obtaining an SUFRN does not 
require submission of any personal information, be it an SSN, date of 
birth, or residential address. Filers can generate an SUFRN simply by 
clicking a button within the electronic Form 323-E as the noncommercial 
ownership report is being prepared. Use of an SUFRN therefore does not 
involve any of the types of information that the Petitioners and other 
NCE commenters assert would discourage participation in NCE station 
governance. By allowing NCE filers to report SUFRNs without first using 
reasonable and good-faith efforts to obtain the information needed to 
report a CORES FRN or RUFRN, we will avoid the potential chilling 
effect that the prospect of enforcement action could have on 
participation in NCE station governance for unpaid board members who 
choose not to provide their personal information to the Commission.
    15. We find that our action today properly balances the need to 
improve the integrity and usability of the Commission's broadcast 
ownership data with the public interest in avoiding the potential 
chilling effect that a mandatory reporting requirement could have on 
participation in NCE station governance. In the 323 and 323-E Order, 
the Commission concluded that requiring unique identifiers for parties 
that hold attributable interests in broadcast stations helps ensure 
that the Commission's ownership data is reliable and usable for studies 
and analyses. We affirm these conclusions and deny the Petitions to the 
extent they suggest that we abandon entirely the use of CORES FRNs and 
RUFRNs in the NCE context. In light of the relief afforded by our 
action herein expanding the option to use SUFRNs on Form 323-E, there 
is no

[[Page 21720]]

justification for removing the option for NCE filers to report a CORES 
FRN or RUFRN for attributable individuals on Form 323-E.
    16. We expect that allowing NCE filers greater flexibility to 
report SUFRNs will not delay or significantly limit the value of our 
data collection. Because expanded use of SUFRNs on Form 323-E will not 
require significant changes to the revised form, we do not believe that 
our action today will delay implementation of revised Form 323-E. 
Moreover, we expect that, due to the nature of our ruling, the use of 
SUFRNs and the resulting collective impact on our broadcast ownership 
data will be limited. In this regard, we emphasize that our ruling 
today applies only to noncommercial broadcasters. Commercial 
broadcasters remain subject to the CORES FRN and RUFRN requirements set 
forth in the 323 and 323-E Order. Further, because SUFRNs are available 
only for individuals, unique FRNs will be reported for entities on 
Forms 323 and 323-E.
    17. Importantly, as we have previously emphasized, filers that 
report an SUFRN for an attributable individual must do so consistently. 
If an SUFRN was reported previously for an individual and the 
individual does not have a CORES FRN or RUFRN, the filer must use the 
same SUFRN that was reported previously for that individual. 
Furthermore, if an individual is reported on multiple reports, the 
filer must ensure that the same SUFRN is reported consistently for that 
individual, assuming that the individual does not have a CORES FRN or 
RUFRN.
    18. We also note that the Commission's prior decision to collect 
data on the race, ethnicity, and gender of individuals holding 
attributable interests in NCE licensees remains undisturbed, and this 
data will be available to the Commission and researchers for purposes 
of evaluating ownership diversity issues. To the extent IPR and UCC et 
al. state that the Commission will not collect race, gender, and 
ethnicity information from NCEs as a result of our action today, these 
belated pleadings are wrong. Although we will not require NCE licensees 
to report unique identifiers for all individuals holding attributable 
interests, the data on race, ethnicity, and gender will not be 
``useless,'' as we will still be able to determine which licensees, 
stations, and markets have minorities and women in NCE leadership 
positions.
    19. In addition, although we are expanding the option to use SUFRNs 
on Form 323-E, in many cases an NCE filer will continue to nonetheless 
report a CORES FRN or RUFRN for an attributable individual. For 
instance, some individuals with attributable interests in NCE stations 
may not object to obtaining a CORES FRN or RUFRN. Also, if an 
individual with an attributable interest in an NCE station has already 
obtained a CORES FRN or RUFRN for another reason (for example, because 
the individual also appears on one or more commercial Form 323 
filings), filers must report that FRN for the individual on Forms 323 
and 323-E. In such circumstances, use of the CORES FRN or RUFRN could 
not be expected to have a chilling effect on the individual's 
participation in NCE station governance. This further supports our 
conclusion that expanded use of SUFRNs on Form 323-E will have a 
limited collective impact on our data collection.
    20. Because we are relieving NCE licensees of the obligation to 
report a CORES FRN or RUFRN for individuals holding attributable 
interests, we need not address NCE Licensees' and Public Broadcasting 
Petitioners' claim that the statutory authority the Commission relied 
on in adopting the requirement does not apply to NCE stations. These 
arguments are moot. Thus, we dismiss these portions of the NCE 
Licensees Petition and Public Broadcasting Parties Petition. SUNY's 
argument that the Privacy Act bars mandatory collection of SSNs from 
individuals holding attributable interests in NCE licensees is moot for 
the same reason, and we dismiss this aspect of the SUNY Petition.
    21. In opposing the CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement, some commenters to 
this proceeding suggest that certain individuals serving on NCE boards 
may be uninvolved with the licensing, operation, or ultimate 
disposition of the noncommercial broadcast license and that it is not 
necessary to include information about these individuals on broadcast 
ownership reports. We take this opportunity to reiterate that, as 
discussed in the 323 and 323-E Order, our rules already contemplate 
that circumstance and afford appropriate relief. Our attribution 
standards, including the standards applicable to attribution exemptions 
for officers and directors, apply to both commercial and NCE stations. 
Specifically, an officer or director can be exempted from attribution 
in the licensee if his or her duties are wholly unrelated to the 
operation of the broadcast station(s) at issue. Exempted officers and 
directors would not be reported as attributable interest holders on the 
Form 323-E and thus would not need to obtain a CORES FRN or RUFRN for 
Form 323 or Form 323-E reporting purposes. Appropriate use of this 
existing exemption would further reduce the burden on NCE licensees and 
potentially avoid the concern of a chilling effect raised by the 
Petitioners. We therefore encourage NCE filers to avail themselves of 
this exemption in order to avoid reporting potential interest holders 
who are uninvolved with the operation of the station(s) and whose 
interests therefore need not be reported.
    22. Although some petitioners argue that differences between NCEs 
and commercial licensees make the collection of NCE data unnecessary, 
the Commission previously rejected this argument, and, as we have 
granted reconsideration regarding the specific aspect of our data 
collection that petitioners challenge, we need not revisit the 
Commission's response to this argument. We note that even though the 
Commission's multiple ownership rules do not apply to NCE stations, 
collecting race, gender, and ethnicity information from NCEs will 
enable the Commission, as well as GAO and other outside researchers, to 
more fully understand and analyze the broadcasting industry, and 
thereby support the Commission's efforts to promote diversity of 
ownership in broadcasting. In an ex parte filed well after the close of 
the pleading cycle, public broadcasting representatives filing as 
``Public Broadcasters'' ask the Commission to consider returning to the 
status quo ante by reversing its prior decision to adopt new rules for 
noncommercial stations in this proceeding. To the extent this request 
applies to other improvements adopted in the 323 and 323-E Order, 
including the collection of race, gender, and ethnicity information 
from NCE Licensees, Public Broadcasters' request is untimely and is 
procedurally barred.
    23. Procedural Matters. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared a 
Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) relating to 
this Report and Order, which is summarized below.
    24. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. This document contains a non-
substantive and non-material modification of information collection 
requirements that were previously reviewed and approved by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, we note that pursuant to 
the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission previously

[[Page 21721]]

sought specific comment on how it might further reduce the information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees.
    25. In this present document, we have assessed the effects of 
requiring NCE filers to report a CORES FRN or RUFRN for each 
attributable interest holder on ownership reports filed with the 
Commission, and we have expanded the option for such filers to report 
SUFRNs for attributable individuals by eliminating the requirement that 
NCE filers first use reasonable and good-faith efforts to obtain the 
personal information needed to report a CORES FRN or RUFRN before using 
an SUFRN. We find that this action properly balances the need to 
improve the integrity and usability of the Commission's broadcast 
ownership data with the potential chilling effects that a mandatory 
reporting requirement could have on participation in NCE station 
governance, and that our action will have the effect of reducing the 
burden on NCE filers, including those with fewer than 25 employees.
    26. Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. 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 the 
rules adopted in this Order on Reconsideration. 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 
Small Business Administration (SBA). The FRFA accompanying the 323 and 
323-E Order described and estimated the number of small entities that 
would be affected by the revisions to FCC Forms 323 and 323-E. The 
actions taken in this Order on Reconsideration apply to the same 
entities affected by the revisions to Form 323-E that the Commission 
adopted in the 323 and 323-E Order.
    27. Television Broadcasting. This Economic Census category 
comprises establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting images 
together with sound. These establishments operate television broadcast 
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 studio, from an affiliated 
network, or from external sources. The SBA has created the following 
small business size standard for such businesses: Those having $38.5 
million or less in annual receipts. The 2012 Economic Census reports 
that 751 firms in this category operated in that year. Of that number, 
656 had annual receipts of less than $25,000,000, 25 had annual 
receipts ranging from $25,000,000 to $49,999,999, and 70 had annual 
receipts of $50,000,000 or more. Based on this data we therefore 
estimate that the majority of commercial television broadcasters are 
small entities under the applicable SBA size standard.
    28. The Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial 
television stations to be 1,383. Of this total, 1,275 stations (or 
about 92 percent) had revenues of $38.5 million or less, according to 
Commission staff review of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro 
Television Database (BIA) on March 9, 2017, and therefore these 
licensees qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. In 
addition, the Commission has estimated the number of licensed NCE 
television stations to be 394. The Commission, however, 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.
    29. 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. In addition, 
another element of the definition of ``small business'' requires that 
an 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 does not exclude any television station from the definition 
of a small business on this basis and is therefore possibly over-
inclusive.
    30. Radio Stations. This Economic Census category comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting aural programs by 
radio to the public. Programming may originate in their own studio, 
from an affiliated network, or from external sources. The SBA has 
established a small business size standard for this category as firms 
having $38.5 million or less in annual receipts. The 2012 Economic 
Census reports that 2,849 firms in this category operated in that year. 
Of that number, 2,806 had annual receipts of less than $25,000,000, 17 
had annual receipts ranging from $25,000,000 to $49,999,999, and 26 had 
annual receipts of $50,000,000 or more. Based on this data we therefore 
estimate that the majority of commercial radio stations are small 
entities under the applicable SBA size standard.
    31. The Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial 
radio stations to be 11,420. Of this total, 11,506 stations (or about 
99.9 percent) had revenues of $38.5 million or less, according to 
Commission staff review of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro 
Television Database (BIA) on March 9, 2017, and therefore these 
licensees qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. In 
addition, the Commission has estimated the number of licensed NCE radio 
stations to be 4,112. The Commission, however, 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.
    32. 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. In addition, 
another element of the definition of ``small business'' requires that 
an entity not be dominant in its field of operation. We further note 
that it is difficult at times to assess these criteria in the context 
of media entities, and the estimate of small businesses to which rules 
may apply does not exclude any radio station from the definition of a 
small business on this basis; thus, our estimate of small businesses 
may therefore be over-inclusive.
    33. Class A TV and LPTV Stations. The same SBA definition that 
applies to television broadcast licensees would apply to Class A TV 
stations and other low power television (LPTV) stations. The SBA 
defines a television broadcast station as a small business if such 
station has no more than $38.5 million in annual receipts. As of March 
31, 2017, there are approximately 417 licensed Class A stations and 
1,965

[[Page 21722]]

licensed LPTV stations. Given the nature of these services, we will 
presume that all of these licensees qualify as small entities under the 
SBA definition. We note, however, that under the SBA's definition, 
revenue of affiliates that are not LPTV stations should be aggregated 
with the LPTV station revenues in determining whether a concern is 
small. Our estimate may thus overstate the number of small entities 
since the revenue figure on which it is based does not include or 
aggregate revenues from non-LPTV affiliated companies.
    34. The Order on Reconsideration provides NCE filers with greater 
flexibility to report SUFRNs than previously allowed by the 323 and 
323-E Order. It does not adopt additional reporting, recordkeeping, 
other compliance requirements.
    35. The Order on Reconsideration provides relief to NCE filers by 
allowing them wider latitude to report SUFRNs--which do not require 
disclosure of an SSN, date of birth, or other personal information--for 
individual attributable interest holders reported on Form 323-E. 
Accordingly, NCE filers may report an SUFRN on Form 323-E for an 
attributable individual who has not obtained a CORES FRN or RUFRN at 
the time the filer submits its ownership report, without the need to 
first use reasonable and good-faith efforts to obtain the information 
needed to report a CORES FRN or RUFRN. The Commission concludes that 
allowing NCEs greater flexibility to report an SUFRN for an 
attributable individual, in lieu of a CORES FRN or RUFRN, will address 
the concerns that have been raised regarding the potential impact of 
the CORES FRN/RUFRN requirement on NCE stations, including small 
entities. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA did not file any 
comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
    36. The Commission will send a copy of this Order on 
Reconsideration to Congress and the Government Accountability Office 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    37. Ordering Clauses. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to 
the authority contained in sections 1, 2(a), 4(i), 257, 303(r), 307, 
309, and 310 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
151, 152(a), 154(i), 257, 303(r), 307, 309, and 310, this Order on 
Reconsideration IS ADOPTED.
    38. It is further ordered that, pursuant to section 405 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 405, and section 
1.429 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.429, that the petitions for 
reconsideration filed by the American Public Media Group, the NCE 
Licensees, the Public Broadcasting Parties, and Lisa S. Campo on behalf 
of the State University of New York, are granted in part, dismissed to 
the extent discussed in footnote 42, and otherwise are denied, to the 
extent stated herein.
    39. It is further ordered that the applications for review filed by 
the NCE Licensees and the University of Michigan are dismissed as moot.
    40. It is further ordered that, pursuant to section 553(d) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d), and section 1.427(b) of 
the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.427(b), this Order on Reconsideration 
shall be effective May 10, 2017, except those provisions that contain 
new or modified information collection requirements that require 
approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act will become effective after the Commission publishes a 
notice in the Federal Register announcing such approval and the 
relevant effective date.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09461 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P