64270 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2004 / Notices 

determination, backed by a national 

quality control process, and 

standardized instrumentation, reference 

samples, calibrations and procedures. 

As part of GIPSA’s on-going efforts to 

evaluate calibrations and programs, 

GIPSA has thoroughly evaluated the 

accuracy of the ANN calibration. ANNrelated information may be found on 

GIPSA’s Web site at: http://

www.usda.gov/gipsa.

Based on its evaluation, GIPSA has 

decided to implement the new ANN 

barley protein calibration on official 

NIRT instruments on July 1, 2005.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71 et seq.

Donna Reifschneider, 

Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–24647 Filed 11–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–EN–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

National Agricultural Library 

Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To 

Collect Information

AGENCY: USDA, Agricultural Research 

Service, National Agricultural Library.

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 

L. 104–13) and Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR 

Part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, 

1995), this notice announces the 

National Agricultural Library’s intent to 

request approval for renewal 

information collection relating to 

existing nutrition education and 

training materials targeting low-income 

persons. This voluntary form gives Food 

Stamp nutrition education providers the 

opportunity to share resources that they 

have developed or used.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by January 10, 2005 to be 

assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments 

concerning this notice to Shannon Fries, 

Technical Information Specialist, Food 

and Nutrition Information Center, 

National Agricultural Library, 10301 

Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 

20705–2351, telephone (301) 504–5368 

or fax (301) 504–6409. 

Submit electronic comments to 

sfries@nal.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Food Stamp Nutrition 

Connection Resource Sharing Form. 

OMB Number: PRA# 0518–0031. 

Expiration Date: Three years from 

date of approval. 

Type of Request: Renewal of existing 

data collection from Food Stamp 

nutrition education providers. 

Abstract: This voluntary ‘‘Sharing 

Form’’ gives Food Stamp nutrition 

education providers the opportunity to 

share information about resources that 

they have developed or used. Data 

collected using this form helps the Food 

and Nutrition Information Center (FNIC) 

identify existing nutrition education 

and training resources for review and 

inclusion in an online database. 

Educators can search this database via 

the Food Stamp Nutrition Connection 

Web site http://www.nal.usda.gov/

foodstamp/. In 2001, the United States 

Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) 

Food and Nutrition Service established 

the Food Stamp Nutrition Connection to 

improve access to Food Stamp Program 

nutrition resources. Educators 

nationwide can use this site to identify 

curricula, lesson plans, research, 

training tools and participant materials. 

Developed and maintained at the 

National Agricultural Library’s FNIC, 

this resource system helps educators 

find the tools and information they need 

to provide quality nutrition education 

for low-income audiences. 

The Sharing Form is available for 

completion online at the Food Stamp 

Nutrition Connection Web site. 

Individuals may also print and return it 

via fax or mail. The form consists of four 

parts. These various sections include: 

Part 1 consisting of three questions 

about the responder; Part 2 with nine 

questions about the resource; Part 3 

with five questions about the resource 

development; and Part 4 with six 

questions about ordering/obtaining the 

resource. Responders are asked to 

complete only relevant sections of the 

form. Instructions about which sections 

to complete, based on one’s relationship 

to the resource, are provided in Part 1. 

For instance, those that use the resource 

but are neither its developer or 

distributor would only complete Parts 1 

and 2. 

This form enables FNIC to inform 

nutrition educators of existing nutrition 

education and training materials 

targeting low-income Americans. This 

identification of existing materials will 

help educators spend their monies 

wisely in the development of needed 

educational resources. 

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting 

burden for this collection of information 

is estimated to average 0.7 minutes per 

response. 

Respondents: Food stamp nutrition 

education providers. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 50 

per year. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 16 hrs. 

Comments 

Comments are invited on (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

for the functions of the agency, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of 

the agency’s estimate of the burden of 

the proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and the assumptions used; 

(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who respond, including the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technology. Comments should be sent to 

the address in the preamble. All 

responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) approval. All comments will 

become a matter of public record.

Dated: October 12, 2004. 

Edward B. Knipling, 

Administrator, ARS.

[FR Doc. 04–24603 Filed 11–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–03–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service 

Poinsett Watershed, Craighead and 

Poinsett Counties, AR

AGENCY: Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of a Finding of No 

Significant Impact. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102 (2)(c) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969; the Council on 

Environmental Quality Regulations (40 

CFR part 1500); and the Natural 

Resources Conservation Service 

Regulations (7 CFR part 650), Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, gives notice 

than an environmental impact statement 

is not being prepared for Segment No. 

7 of Main Ditch, Poinsett Watershed, 

Craighead and Poinsett Counties, 

Arkansas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kalven L. Trice, State Conservationist, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 

Room 3416, Federal Building, 700 West 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2004 / Notices 64271

Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 

72201–3225.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

environmental assessment of this 

federally assisted action indicates that 

the project will not cause significant 

local, regional, or national impacts on 

the environment. As a result of these 

findings, Kalven L. Trice, State 

Conservationist, has determined that the 

preparation and review of an 

environmental impact statement are not 

needed for this project. 

The purpose of this project is to 

provide flood control. The planned 

works of improvement include four 

miles of channel improvement for 

Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch south 

of Jonesboro, Arkansas in the Poinsett 

Watershed. 

A limited number of copies of the 

FONSI are available at the above 

address to fill single copy requests. 

Basic data developed during the 

environmental assessment are on file 

and may be reviewed by contacting 

David Weeks, Assistant State 

Conservationist Natural Resource 

Planning, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, Room 3416, 

Federal Building, 700 West Capitol 

Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201–

3225. 

No administrative action on 

implementation of the proposal will be 

taken until 30 days after the date of this 

publication in the Federal Register.

Dated: October 15, 2004. 

Kalven L. Trice, 

State Conservationist.

Finding of No Significant Impact for 

Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch Poinsett 

Watershed; Craighead and Poinsett Counties, 

Arkansas 

Poinsett Watershed is a federally assisted 

action authorized under Pub. L. 83–566, 

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention 

Act of 1954, as amended. The original 

Poinsett Watershed Work Plan was prepared 

in February 1968. The primary purpose of the 

plan is to provide flood reduction to the 

agricultural lands subject to flood damages. 

The plan was prepared by the local 

sponsoring organizations with technical 

assistance from the Natural Resources 

Conservation Service (NRCS). The 

Supplemental Watershed Plan No. 4 was 

prepared to add Segment No. 7 of the Main 

Ditch to the Plan. The Environmental 

Assessment (EA) was prepared to update and 

review items that are of concern with 

channel improvement for Segment No. 7 of 

the Main Ditch considering the present rules 

and regulations. 

This particular action involves only the 

channel improvement of Segment No. 7 of 

the Poinsett Watershed. Federal assistance 

will be provided under authority of the Pub. 

L. 83–566, Watershed Protection and Flood 

Prevention Act of 1954, as amended. The EA 

was conducted in consultation with local, 

State, and Federal agencies as well as with 

interested organizations and individuals.

Data developed during the assessment are 

available for public review at the following 

location: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 

Room 3416, Federal Building, 700 West 

Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 

72201–3225. 

The drainage area at the downstream end 

of the Segment No. 7 is 20.6 square miles. 

The project area is located in northeastern 

Arkansas in Craighead and Poinsett Counties. 

The southern limit of the city of Jonesboro is 

located in the northern most part of the 

watershed. The watershed land use of 

Segment No. 7 is about 30 percent (%) urban, 

40% cropland, and 30% pasture, range, and 

woods. 

Local Sponsoring organizations are 

Poinsett Watershed Improvement District, 

Craighead County Conservation District, and 

Poinsett County Conservation District. 

Alternatives 

Alternative 1 is the No Action or Future 

Without Project. This alternative consists of 

maintaining the existing channel capacity of 

Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch. No Federal 

funds would be spent on Segment No. 7. 

Flood damages to agricultural areas, 

infrastructure, and residential area in the 

floodplain would continue at the present 

level. 

Alternative 2 is the Channel Improvement 

of Segment No. 7. This alternative consists of 

improving the existing channel from station 

1328+00 to 1542+60, two rock chutes to 

stabilize grade, and 33 grade stabilization 

structures to drop water from the field or 

drains into the ditch improvement. This 

alternative will meet the need and purpose 

of the project to provide flood protection 

benefits to the agricultural land along 

Segment No. 7, infrastructure in the project 

area, and residences in the southern part of 

Jonesboro. 

Recommended Action 

Alternative 2 is the recommended 

alternative and consists of channel 

improvement of Segment No. 7 of the Main 

Ditch to provide for flood prevention 

benefits. This alternative provides the most 

net benefits and is the National Economic 

Development (NED) Plan. 

Effects of Recommended Action 

Benefits of Recommended Action 

The estimated total average annual 

monetary benefits will be $94,220. The 

average annual cost is $78,000, resulting in 

a benefit to cost ratio of 1.2 to 1.0. 

Impacts of Recommended Action 

Floodwater Impact 

The existing channel has inadequate 

capacity to protect cropland and other 

agricultural lands from flooding by moving 

floodwaters from Jonesboro through the 

agricultural areas. The average annual area 

flooded within Segment No. 7 evaluation 

reach is approximately 1770 acres. Channel 

improvement of Segment No. 7 would reduce 

flood damages to agricultural lands, 

infrastructure, and other private lands. The 

average annual area flooded would be 

reduced by 1,470 acres. 

Archeological and Historical Impact 

Requirements of Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as 

amended were fully implemented. Planning 

activities for the protection and preservation 

of historic properties have been conducted in 

compliance with Section 106 and Section 

110 (f) and (k) of the National Historic 

Preservation Act. Processes consistent with 

the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation regulations (36 CFR 800) have 

been followed by NRCS. No known cultural 

resources were identified. NRCS will take 

action to protect and/or recover any historic 

properties discovered during construction.

Fish and Wildlife Resources Impact 

The land use on both sides of the ditch is 

open cropland with the exception of two 

small wooded areas. The open cropland 

affords food for seed-eating birds and 

provides some ground cover. Water within 

the ditch is very shallow and unshaded. 

Some species of fish such as sunfish, carp, 

buffalo, and catfish may use the ditch at 

various times. However, fishery habitats are 

very low quality and are of very little value 

as a fishery resource. 

The channel improvement will have minor 

short-term impact on the existing fishery 

habitats. Reduction in flooding depth and 

duration in the floodplain will improve the 

upland wildlife habitats on agricultural land. 

Threatened and Endangered Species Impact 

The endangered fat pocketbook Potamilus 

copax (mussel) occurs within Craighead 

County, Arkansas. However, the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service has determined that this 

endangered species is not located within the 

project area (USFWS, 2004). The project will 

have no adverse impacts to any threatened 

and endangered species. 

Prime Farmland 

Presently, there are 4,005 acres of prime 

farmland in the project area. Prime farmland 

will be impacted by reduced frequency and 

depth of flooding on 1,209 acres. 

Enlargement of the planned channel will 

result in a loss of 78 acres of prime farmland 

adjacent to the existing ditch. Overall there 

will be a positive impact on prime farmland 

due to a reduction in flooding. 

Wetlands Impact 

The land use on both sides of the ditch is 

open cropland with the exception of two 

small wooded areas. The wooded area 

located at approximately from channel 

station 1369+00 to station 1381+00 has some 

minor wetlands. These are located greater 

than 90 feet from the centerline of the 

existing channel. 

Construction methods will be used to 

avoid any adverse impacts. The channel will 

be constructed from both sides with spoil 

placed approximately equally on both sides 

of the ditch except at the location from 

channel station 1369+00 to station 1381+00. 

At that location construction methods will be 

used to limit fill on the side where the 

wooded area is located. Constructed channel 

dimensions on the wooded area side will not 

64272 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2004 / Notices 

extend past 90 feet with limited fill on that 

side to maintain existing wetlands and spoil 

elevations. Using these construction 

methods, there will be no adverse impacts to 

the minor wetlands within the wooded area. 

Environmental Values Changed or Lost 

Disturbed areas will be planted to 

permanent grasses.

Resource Impact 

Land use changes .................................................................................... No impact. 

Floodplains ............................................................................................... Positive impact by reducing flood damages. 

Fish and Wildlife Habitats ......................................................................... Minor short-term adverse impacts on these habitats. 

Threatened and Endangered Species ..................................................... No adverse impact on threatened and endangered species. 

Wetlands ................................................................................................... No impact on wetlands. 

Cultural Resources ................................................................................... No impact. 

Prime Farmland ........................................................................................ Positive impact by reducing flooding on prime farmland. 

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of 

Resources 

Construction, operation, and maintenance 

of the channel improvement of Segment No. 

7 of the Main Ditch will require irretrievable 

commitments of energy, material, and 

financial resources, as typical for similar 

projects. 

Consultation and Public Participation 

Project Sponsors 

Original local sponsoring organizations 

(sponsors) are the Poinsett Watershed 

Improvement District, Craighead 

Conservation District, and Poinsett 

Conservation District. At the initiation of the 

planning process, meetings were held with 

representatives of the sponsors to ascertain 

their watershed concerns and project 

purposes. Meetings with the sponsors were 

held throughout the planning process. 

Planning Team 

An Interdisciplinary Planning Team 

provided for the technical administration of 

this project. Examples of tasks completed by 

the Planning Team include, but are not 

limited to, preliminary investigations, 

hydrologic and engineering analysis, 

economic analysis, formulating and 

evaluating alternatives, and writing the 

Supplemental Watershed Plan and EA. 

Informal discussions among the planning 

team, sponsors, NRCS, and landowners were 

conducted throughout the planning period. 

Input From Agencies and Groups 

Twenty-eight letters were sent to Federal, 

State, and local agencies requesting 

information available and concerns on 

Poinsett Watershed, Segment No. 7 of the 

Main Ditch. A meeting and field tour with 

agencies were held on May 5, 2004, to assess 

proposed measures and their potential 

impact on resources of concern. Eleven 

Federal, State, and local agencies were 

invited to participate. The following agencies 

participated in this field review: 

• Arkansas Department of Environmental 

Quality; 

• USDA–NRCS State, Area, Project, and 

Field levels; 

• Poinsett Watershed Improvement 

District. 

Other agencies invited but not attending 

included the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

Public Participation 

A public meeting was held on April 14, 

2004, to explain the proposed channel 

improvement and to scope resource 

problems, issues, and concerns of local 

residents associated with the Poinsett 

Watershed, Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch. 

Notice of the public meeting was posted and 

published in the local newspaper over three 

consecutive weeks. In addition, a letter of 

notice of meeting and comment forms were 

mailed to potentially affected landowners 

around Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch. The 

meeting participants provided verbal and 

written comment on issues and concerns to 

be considered in the planning process. 

A coordination meeting with project 

sponsors and NRCS was held on June 10, 

2004, to summarize planning 

accomplishments, convey results of the 

hydraulic analysis, and present various 

channel improvement alternatives. 

Consensus was reached on the layout and 

configuration of the Channel Improvement 

Alternative. A follow-up meeting was 

conducted with the sponsors, officials with 

the city of Jonesboro, and Craighead County 

on August 31, 2004. 

A Final Draft was distributed on July 21, 

2004, for interagency and public review to 

appropriate local, state, and federal agencies 

and other interested groups. The availability 

of Final Draft was publicized in the local 

newspaper. The Final Draft was distributed 

to the following agencies and groups for 

review and comment. 

Local Groups and Agencies 

Poinsett County Watershed Improvement 

District, Craighead County Conservation 

District, Poinsett County Conservation 

District, Mayor, City of Jonesboro, and 

Craighead County Judge.

Federal Agencies 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Memphis District, USDA 

Forest Service, Southern Region, USDA/Farm 

Service Agency, USDA/Rural Development, 

USDA/FSA, and Federal Highway 

Administration. 

State Agencies 

Governor’s Office, State Clearinghouse, 

Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation 

Commission, Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission, AR Department of Health, AR 

Department of Parks and Tourism, AR 

Waterways Commission, AR Forestry 

Commission, AR Natural Heritage 

Commission, Arkansas Department of 

Environmental Quality, AR Department of 

Economic Development, AR Highway & 

Transportation Dept., Natural Resources 

Leasing, Arkansas Geological Commission, 

Arkansas Department of Emergency 

Management, and Arkansas Water Resources 

Research Center. 

Environmental Organizations 

Wildlife Management Institute, Arkansas 

Wildlife Federation, National Audubon 

Society, and National Wildlife Federation. 

After a 45-day review period, comments 

were incorporated into the Final 

Supplemental Watershed Plan and EA. 

Determination of Significance 

Table 1 displays a summary of comparison 

of the environmental impacts on important 

resource concerns.

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY COMPARISON OF IMPACTS ON IMPORTANT RESOURCE CONCERNS

Effects Alternative No. 1

No action 

Alternative No. 2

Channel improvement (NED) 

Structural ............................................................ Maintain Segment No. 7 channel at existing 

flow capacity.

Improve channel of Segment No. 7 to required flow capacity. 

Project Investment .............................................. $0 ..................................................................... $1,292,480. 

National Economic Development 

Beneficial Annual ................................................ $0 ..................................................................... $94,226. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2004 / Notices 64273

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY COMPARISON OF IMPACTS ON IMPORTANT RESOURCE CONCERNS—Continued

Effects Alternative No. 1

No action 

Alternative No. 2

Channel improvement (NED) 

Adverse Annual .................................................. $0 ..................................................................... $78,000. 

Net Beneficial ..................................................... $0 ..................................................................... $16,226. 

Environmental Quality Account 

Threatened and Endangered Species ............... No impact ......................................................... No impact. 

Streams, Lakes, and Wetlands .......................... No impact ......................................................... No impact. 

Prime Farmland .................................................. No impact ......................................................... Reduce flooding on 1209 acres. 

Fish and Wildlife Habitats ................................... Adversely impacted .......................................... No impact. 

Water Quality ...................................................... Increase in stream turbidity ............................. Short term decrease in water quality during 

construction and improvement of water 

quality long term. 

Sedimentation ..................................................... No impact ......................................................... No significant long term impact. 

Other Social Effects 

Average Annual Flood damages ........................ Increase in average annual acres flooded 

above existing 1990 acres and in flood 

damages to infrastructure and residences.

Flood protection to agricultural lands by reducing average annual area flooded by 

1,385 acres, reduce flood damages to infrastructure and residences. 

Cultural and Historic Resources ......................... No impact ......................................................... No impact. 

Land Use and Floodplain Management ............. Land use might change as increased flooding 

decreases land productivity.

No change to land use and improvement to 

land management decisions. 

Transportation and Access ................................ Increased flooding of five roads and one 

bridge located downstream.

Transportation access would be maintained 

and improved. 

Regional Economic Development Account (Positive Effects/Negative Effects Annualized) 

Region ................................................................ $0 / $0 ............................................................... $0 / $27,300. 

Nation ................................................................. $0 / $0 ............................................................... $94,226 / $50,700. 

Conclusion 

The purpose of the improvement to 

Segment No. 7 of the Main Ditch is to 

provide flood prevention benefits to the 

agricultural lands, infrastructure, and 

residential area along Segment No. 7. The 

Environmental Assessment summarized 

above indicates that this Federal action will 

not cause significant local, regional, or 

national impacts on the environment. I find 

that neither the proposed action nor any of 

the alternatives is a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment. Therefore, based on 

above findings, I have determined that an 

Environmental Impact Statement for Segment 

No. 7 of the Main Ditch, Poinsett Watershed 

is not required.

Dated: October 15, 2004. 

Kalven L. Trice, 

State Conservationist.

[FR Doc. 04–24546 Filed 11–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–16–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service 

Information Collection Activity; 

Comment Request

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended), the 

Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites 

comments on this information 

collection for which RUS intends to 

request approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB).

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by January 3, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard C. Annan, Acting Director, 

Program Development and Regulatory 

Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 

Independence Ave., SW., STOP 1522, 

Room 5174 South Building, 

Washington, DC 20250–1522. 

Telephone: (202) 720–0784, FAX: (202) 

720–4120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office 

of Management and Budget’s (OMB) 

regulation (5 CFR part 1320) 

implementing provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 

L. 104–13) requires that interested 

members of the public and affected 

agencies have an opportunity to 

comment on information collection and 

recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 

1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an 

information collection that RUS is 

submitting to OMB for extension. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Agency, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of 

the Agency’s estimate of the burden of 

the proposed collection of information 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. Comments may be sent to: 

Richard C. Annan, Director, Program 

Development and Regulatory Analysis, 

Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, STOP 1522, Room 5068, 

1400 Independence Ave., SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–1522. FAX: 

(202) 720–4120. 

Title: Public Television Station Digital 

Transition Grant Program. 

OMB Control Number: 0572–0134. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

currently approved information 

collection. 

Abstract: As part of the nation’s 

evolution to digital television, the 

Federal Communications Commission 

had ordered all television broadcasters