Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 68815

Appendices A and B—[Amended]

■ 2. Appendices A and B to part 355 are 

amended by removing the entry for CAS 

No. 732–11–6 for the Chemical Name 

Phosmet.

[FR Doc. 04–26162 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Part 447

[CMS–2175–F] 

RIN 0938–AM20

Medicaid Program; Time Limitation on 

Recordkeeping Requirements Under 

the Drug Rebate Program

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule finalizes 10-

year recordkeeping requirements for 

drug manufacturers under the Medicaid 

drug rebate program. Manufacturers 

must retain records for 10 years from the 

date the manufacturer reports data to us 

for a rebate period. 

This final rule also finalizes the 

requirement that manufacturers must 

retain records beyond the 10-year period 

if the records are known by the 

manufacturer to be the subject of an 

audit or a government investigation. 

Furthermore, this final rule responds 

to public comments on the January 6, 

2004 interim final rule with comment 

period and the proposed rule pertaining 

to the 10-year recordkeeping 

requirements, respectively.

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 

2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim 

Howell, (410) 786–6762.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In order for a pharmaceutical 

manufacturer’s products to be eligible 

for Medicaid reimbursement under 

section 1903(a) of the Social Security 

Act (the Act), the manufacturer must 

sign an agreement with us on behalf of 

the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services to participate in the Medicaid 

drug rebate program. Among the terms 

to which the manufacturer must agree is 

the requirement to retain pricing data to 

support the calculation of average 

manufacturer price and best price as 

defined in section 1927 of the Act. 

Absent a regulatory or statutory 

requirement, it has been our position 

that manufacturers must retain these 

records indefinitely. 

On September 19, 1995, we published 

a proposed rule (60 FR 48442) in the 

Federal Register that proposed 

numerous provisions related to the 

Medicaid drug rebate program. As 

relevant to this rule, we proposed a new 

3-year recordkeeping requirement for 

drug manufacturers under the Medicaid 

drug rebate program and proposed a 3-

year time limitation during which 

manufacturers must recalculate and 

report data to us on the average 

manufacturer price and best price. On 

August 29, 2003, we published a final 

rule with comment period (68 FR 

51912) in the Federal Register that 

finalized both provisions. On September 

26, 2003, we issued a correction notice 

(68 FR 55527) in the Federal Register to 

change the effective date of the August 

29, 2003 rule from October 1, 2003 to 

January 1, 2004. 

II. Provisions of the Proposed 

Regulations and Interim Final Rule 

On January 6, 2004, we published an 

interim final rule with comment period 

that removed the 3-year recordkeeping 

requirement issued in the August 29, 

2003 final rule with comment period, 

and replaced it with 10-year 

recordkeeping requirements on a 

temporary basis for manufacturers 

participating in the Medicaid drug 

rebate program, and solicited comments 

on the 10-year requirement. 

Under the 10-year recordkeeping 

requirement, we required that 

manufacturers retain records for 10 

years from the date the manufacturer 

reports data to us for a rebate period. We 

also required that manufacturers retain 

records beyond the 10-year period if the 

records are the subject of an audit or a 

government investigation of which the 

manufacturer is aware and if the audit 

findings or investigation related to the 

average manufacturer price and best 

price have not been resolved. The 

provisions of the January 6, 2004 

interim final rule related to record 

retention are scheduled to sunset on 

December 31, 2004. 

In addition, the January 6, 2004 

interim final rule with comment period 

responded to public comments on the 

August 29, 2003 final rule with 

comment period that pertain to the 3-

year recordkeeping requirement at 

§ 447.534(h). The 3-year recordkeeping 

requirement for drug manufacturers 

participating in the Medicaid drug 

rebate program has caused a significant 

amount of concern from commenters 

with regard to the False Claims Act 

(FCA) and other possible fraud and 

abuse violations. 

Also, on January 6, 2004, we 

published a proposed rule (69 FR 565) 

that would remove the 3-year 

recordkeeping requirement and replace 

it with 10-year recordkeeping 

requirement on a permanent basis. We 

also proposed that manufacturers must 

retain records beyond the 10-year period 

if the manufacturers are aware that the 

records are the subject of an audit or a 

government investigation and if the 

audit findings or investigation related to 

the manufacturer’s average 

manufacturer price and best price have 

not been resolved. This final rule 

finalizes both the interim final rule and 

the proposed rule that we published on 

January 6, 2004.

III. Analysis of and Response to Public 

Comments on the January 6, 2004 

Interim Final With Comment Period 

and Proposed Rule 

We received 3 timely comments in 

response to the January 6, 2004 interim 

final rule with comment period and 

proposed rule. We received comments 

from an attorney who represents the 

pharmaceutical industry, a coalition 

comprised of national advocacy groups, 

and a non-profit organization. These 

comments and our responses are 

summarized below. 

Comment: One commenter urged us 

to promulgate the 10-year requirement 

as a final rule, effective before the 

expiration of the current 10-year 

requirement on December 31, 2004. 

Response: We agree; therefore, we are 

issuing this final rule to permanently 

establish the 10-year recordkeeping 

requirements for manufacturers. 

Comment: One commenter expressed 

the opinion that the January 6, 2004 

interim final rule and proposed rule 

should be modified to change the record 

retention requirements back to 3 years. 

A manufacturer would still have the 

discretion to retain records for as long 

as it wanted, but would not be subject 

to a mandatory requirement in excess of 

the 3-year period. The government 

would not be restricted by these rules 

from pursuing claims under the False 

Claims Act (FCA) or applicable health 

care laws against a manufacturer for 

fraud, abuse, or knowingly submitting 

false data to the government. Changing 

the record retention requirement back to 

3 years would reconcile the current 

conflict between the 10-year record 

retention requirement and the 3-year 

price recalculation reporting 

requirement. The commenter further 

stated that the interim final rule and the 

proposed rule should be finalized to 

clearly state that the 3-year time 

68816 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

limitation is a statute of limitations and 

that a manufacturer will not be liable or 

obligated to pay the government or be 

entitled to be the beneficiary of any 

errors in calculations for periods outside 

of the 3-year time limitation. 

Response: We believe that it is 

necessary to replace the 3-year 

provision with a 10-year provision to 

address concerns regarding Federal and 

State investigations for fraud under the 

FCA and related anti-fraud provisions 

concerning the Medicaid drug rebate 

program. Since the manufacturer is 

often unaware of the qui tam 

investigations, we must ensure that 

manufacturers participating in the 

Medicaid drug rebate program do not 

erroneously conclude that they could 

discard records concerning drug price 

calculations, as well as data supporting 

those calculations that are subject to the 

FCA and other fraud laws. The qui tam 

whistleblower provisions allow persons 

with evidence of fraud against Federal 

programs or contracts to bring suit on 

behalf of the government. Qui tam 

actions are filed under seal and 

preliminary investigations often take 

place without notice to manufacturers. 

As noted in the January 6, 2004 

interim final rule, we received 

comments suggesting that the 3-year 

recordkeeping requirements were too 

short, but none to convince us to 

expand the time limit on pricing 

recalculations. Therefore, since 

manufacturers are in full possession of 

the documents that they need to make 

pricing recalculations, we continue to 

believe that 3 years is an adequate 

timeframe to permit manufacturers to 

recalculate their pricing data. 

Furthermore, the 3-year limitation rule 

was designed to establish time limits for 

reporting recalculations and to decrease 

associated administrative burdens on 

manufacturers and States. After further 

consideration, we firmly believe that the 

10–year provision will be more 

appropriate and sufficient to ensure a 

Federal standard with regard to the 

Medicaid drug rebate program that will 

not hinder the activities of Federal and 

State law enforcement activities 

regarding the issues of potential fraud 

and abuse violations and litigation.

Comment: One commenter expressed 

the opinion that the 10-year 

recordkeeping requirement is a 

significant improvement over the 

original rule, and will provide a more 

effective safeguard against improper or 

fraudulent drug price inflation and 

abuse of both the Medicaid rebate 

program and the program under section 

340B of the Public Health Service Act. 

However, the commenter believes that 

an even longer period of record 

retention should be required of drug 

manufacturers. 

Response: We recognize that there is 

some cross-over between the data 

required for the Medicaid drug rebate 

program and the 340B program. 

However, our regulation is solely 

designed to address the Medicaid drug 

rebate program. We believe that a 10-

year recordkeeping requirement is 

consistent with the FCA and offers 

immediate protection to address 

potential fraud and abuse violations and 

litigation. 

IV. Provisions of the Final Rule 

We are adopting the provisions of the 

regulation text in the January 6, 2004 

proposed rule. We are making editorial 

changes to § 447.534(h)(1)(i) and we are 

removing paragraph (h)(2), which was 

included in the interim final rule with 

comment. This final rule establishes a 

permanent 10-year recordkeeping 

requirement for prescription drug 

manufacturers that participate in the 

Medicaid drug rebate program. This 

provision would be set forth in 42 CFR 

part 447 subpart I. Under the 10-year 

recordkeeping requirement, we require 

that a drug manufacturer retain records 

for 10 years from the date the 

manufacturer reports that rebate 

period’s data to us. In addition, we 

require a manufacturer retain data 

beyond the 10-year period if the 

manufacturer is aware that the records 

are the subject of an audit or a 

government investigation and if the 

audit findings or investigation related to 

the manufacturer’s average 

manufacturer price and best price have 

not been resolved. 

In addition, in § 447.534, we are 

removing the paragraph (ii) [Reserved] 

at the end of the section, which is a 

misprint. The paragraph that precedes it 

is the lower case letter ‘‘i.’’ It was 

misconstrued for the roman numeral 

one (i). Thus, paragraph (ii) is erroneous 

and should be removed. 

V. Collection of Information 

Requirements 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) of 1995, we are required to 

provide 30-day notice in the Federal 

Register and solicit public comment 

when a collection of information 

requirement is submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval. In order to fairly 

evaluate whether an information 

collection should be approved by OMB, 

section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA 

requires that we solicit comment on the 

following issues: 

• The need for the information 

collection and its usefulness in carrying 

out the proper functions of our agency. 

• The accuracy of our estimate of the 

information collection burden. 

• The quality, utility, and clarity of 

the information to be collected. 

• Recommendations to minimize the 

information collection burden on the 

affected public, including automated 

collection techniques. 

However, the collection requirements 

referenced below are currently approved 

by OMB, under OMB control number 

0938–0578, entitled ‘‘Medicaid Drug 

Rebate Program, Manufacturers’’. 

Section 447.534 Manufacturer 

Reporting Requirements 

Paragraph (h) of this section states a 

manufacturer must retain records 

(written or electronic) for 10 years from 

the date the manufacturer reports data 

to CMS for a rebate period. The records 

must include these data and any other 

materials from which the calculations of 

the average manufacturer price and best 

price are derived, including a record of 

any assumptions made in the 

calculations. The 10-year timeframe 

applies to a manufacturer’s quarterly 

submission of pricing data and any 

revised pricing data subsequently 

submitted to CMS. 

VI. Regulatory Impact Analysis 

A. Overall Impact 

We have examined the impacts of this 

rule as required by Executive Order 

12866 (September 1993, Regulatory 

Planning and Review), the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 16, 

1980, Pub. L. 96–354), section 1102(b) of 

the Social Security Act, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4), and Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12866 (as amended 

by Executive Order 13258, which 

merely assigns responsibility of duties) 

directs agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). A regulatory impact analysis 

(RIA) must be prepared for major rules 

with economically significant effects 

($100 million or more in any 1 year). We 

do not believe this rule will have an 

economically significant effect. We 

believe the rule will not result in costs 

to the Medicaid program and that 

additional costs to drug manufacturers 

will be minimal. We do not consider 

this rule to be a major rule.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 68817

The RFA requires agencies to analyze 

options for regulatory relief of small 

businesses. For purposes of the RFA, 

small entities include small businesses, 

nonprofit organizations, and 

government agencies. Most hospitals 

and most other providers and suppliers 

are small entities, either by nonprofit 

status or by having revenues of $6 

million to $29 million in any 1 year. For 

purposes of the RFA, pharmaceutical 

manufacturers with 750 or fewer 

employees are considered small 

businesses according to the Small 

Business Administration’s size 

standards matched to the North 

American Industry Classification 

System, effective October 1, 2002, 

(http://www.sba.gov/size/

sizetable2002.html). Use of the Small 

Business Administration’s size 

standards matched to North American 

Industry Classification System is in 

compliance with the Small Business 

Administration’s regulation that set 

forth size standards for health care 

industries at 65 FR 69432. Individuals 

and States are not included in the 

definition of a small entity. Because 

pharmaceutical manufacturers are not 

required to report their numbers of 

employees to the Small Business 

Administration, we find there is no 

practical way to determine how many 

are considered small entities out of a 

total of 3,295 firms and establishment as 

reported by the United States Census 

Bureau (see http://www.census.gov/csd/

susb/usaalliol.xls). Therefore, we 

believe this rule will not have a 

significant impact on small businesses 

because, although some pharmaceutical 

manufacturers may be small businesses, 

we estimate that the cost to 

manufacturers will be minimal, as 

described in section VII.B below. 

In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act 

requires us to prepare a regulatory 

impact analysis if a rule may have a 

significant impact on the operations of 

a substantial number of small rural 

hospitals. This analysis must conform to 

the provisions of section 604 of the 

RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of 

the Act, we define a small rural hospital 

as a hospital that is located outside of 

a Metropolitan Statistical Area and has 

fewer than 100 beds. This rule will not 

have a significant impact on small rural 

hospitals, because the provisions 

contained herein do not pertain to 

hospitals. 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also 

requires that agencies assess anticipated 

costs and benefits before issuing any 

rule that may result in expenditure in 

any 1 year by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $110 million. We 

anticipate this rule will not impact State 

governments or the private sector. 

Executive Order 13132 establishes 

certain requirements that an agency 

must meet when it promulgates a 

proposed rule (and subsequent final 

rule) that imposes substantial direct 

requirement costs on State and local 

governments, preempts State law, or 

otherwise has Federalism implications. 

We do not anticipate this rule will 

impose any direct requirement costs on 

State governments. 

B. Anticipated Effects 

1. Effects on Drug Manufacturers 

We do not collect information on the 

costs associated with manufacturer 

recordkeeping under the Medicaid drug 

rebate program. Therefore, in the 

absence of such information, we derived 

an estimate based on our annual costs 

of storing electronic pricing data that we 

receive from approximately 500 drug 

manufacturers. We store drug product 

data, including pricing information, for 

approximately 55,000 drug products. 

Over the course of the 12 years the 

Medicaid drug rebate program has been 

in existence, we have gathered nearly 

250 megabytes of information. This 

information fits on one compact disc. 

The cost of one blank compact disc is 

less than $1. We did not have a 

reasonable proxy available to estimate 

the staffing costs associated with 

maintaining the data, so our estimate 

does not include these costs. 

On the whole, we believe this 

approach is reasonable because it is our 

understanding that these records are 

maintained by most manufacturers in an 

electronic format, while smaller 

companies may maintain their pricing 

records in written format. In order to 

more accurately evaluate the fiscal 

impact of this provision in the final 

rule, we requested that manufacturers 

provide us with information on the 

costs they would expect to incur 

pursuant to retaining records for a 10-

year period. To the extent possible, we 

asked that manufacturers make an effort 

to distinguish between the costs of 

meeting the 10-year recordkeeping 

requirement versus other recordkeeping 

requirements that may apply to the 

same records. However, we did not 

receive any information or data in 

response to our request regarding the 

expected cost that would be incurred 

pursuant to retaining records for a 10-

year period necessary to determine 

whether our original assumptions were 

unsubstantiated. Accordingly, we 

continue to believe that our estimates 

are reasonable. 

We do not anticipate that this rule 

will adversely affect a drug 

manufacturer’s participation in the 

Medicaid drug rebate program or impact 

the current level of access and 

availability of prescription drugs for 

Medicaidbeneficiaries. There is no 

impact on contractors or providers. 

2. Effects on the Medicaid Program 

We are unable to quantitatively 

address the burden to States with 

respect to recordkeeping. This rule will 

not adversely affect a State’s ability to 

obtain manufacturers’ rebates or impact 

the current level of access and 

availability of prescription drugs for 

Medicaid beneficiaries. There is no 

impact on Medicaid providers or 

contractors. 

C. Alternatives Considered 

Retain the 3-Year Recordkeeping 

provision in the August 29, 2003 final 

rule with comment period.

We considered retaining the 3-year 

recordkeeping provision in the August 

29, 2003 final rule with comment 

period. However, we believe it is 

necessary to replace the 3-year 

provision with a 10-year provision to 

address concerns regarding Federal and 

State investigations for fraud under the 

FCA concerning the Medicaid drug 

rebate program. 

Establish a different time limitation. 

Another alternative would be to 

establish a longer or shorter 

recordkeeping requirement. We did not 

choose a longer recordkeeping 

timeframe because we believe a 10-year 

period will offer immediate protection 

to address situations where 

investigations are under seal in qui tam 

actions. Further, the exception to the 10-

year requirement adequately addresses 

situations where investigations known 

to manufacturers are not yet resolved. 

We did not choose a shorter 

recordkeeping timeframe in this rule 

because we are concerned that such a 

timeframe could be misconstrued to 

lead a manufacturer to believe that it 

could prematurely destroy vital 

evidence in a potential fraud and abuse 

litigation. 

Finalize the 10-year recordkeeping 

requirement with a sunset date 

provision.

We considered finalizing the 10-year 

recordkeeping requirement with a 

sunset date provision. However, we did 

not choose to finalize the provision with 

a sunset date because as discussed 

previously, we have concerns about the 

potential premature destruction of 

evidence in false claims act litigation.

68818 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

D. Conclusion 

For these reasons, we are not 

preparing analyses for either the RFA or 

section 1102(b) of the Act because we 

have determined, and we certify, that 

this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities or a significant 

impact on the operations of a substantial 

number of small rural hospitals. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Executive Order 12866, this regulation 

was reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget.

List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 447

Accounting, Administrative practice 

and procedure, Drugs, Grant programs—

health, Health facilities, Health 

professions, Medicaid, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Rural 

areas.

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR 

chapter IV as set forth below:

PART 447—PAYMENTS FOR 

SERVICES

■ 1. The authority for citation for part 

447 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 1102 of the Social Security 

Act (42 U.S.C. 1302).

Subpart I—Payment for Outpatient 

Prescription Drugs Under Drug Rebate 

Agreements

■ 2. In § 447.534, the following changes 

are made:

■ A. Paragraph (h)(1)(i) is revised.

■ B. Paragraph (h)(1)(ii) is republished.

■ C. Paragraph (h)(2) is removed and 

reserved.

■ D. Paragraph (i) is republished.

■ E. The paragraph designated (ii) 

[Reserved] at the end of the section is 

removed.

§ 447.534 Manufacturer reporting 

requirements.

* * * * *

(h) Recordkeeping requirements. (1)(i) 

A manufacturer must retain records 

(written or electronic) for 10 years from 

the date the manufacturer reports data 

to CMS for that rebate period. The 

records must include these data and any 

other materials from which the 

calculations of the average manufacturer 

price and best price are derived, 

including a record of any assumptions 

made in the calculations. The 10-year 

timeframe applies to a manufacturer’s 

quarterly submission of pricing data, as 

well as any revised pricing data 

subsequently submitted to CMS. 

(ii) A manufacturer must retain 

records beyond the 10-year period if 

both of the following circumstances 

exist: 

(A) The records are the subject of an 

audit or of a government investigation 

related to pricing data that are used in 

average manufacturer price or best price 

of which the manufacturer is aware. 

(B) The audit findings or investigation 

related to the average manufacturer 

price and best price have not been 

resolved. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(i) Timeframe for reporting revised 

average manufacturer price or best 

price. A manufacturer must report to 

CMS revisions to average manufacturer 

price or best price for a period not to 

exceed 12 quarters from the quarter in 

which the data were due.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance 

Program)

Dated: August 18, 2004. 

Mark B. McClellan, 

Administrator, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services.

Approved: September 8, 2004. 

Tommy G. Thompson, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–25969 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 04–3522, MB Docket No. 04–253, RM–

11007] 

Digital Television Broadcast Service; 

Greeley, CO

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the 

request of Thomas Desmond, allots DTV 

channel 45 to Greeley, Colorado, as the 

community’s first local commercial 

television service. See 69 FR 45301, July 

29, 2004. DTV channel 45 can be 

allotted to Greeley, Colorado, in 

compliance with the Sections 73.623(d) 

and 73.625(a) at reference coordinates 

40–25–15 N. and 104–31–30 W. With 

this action, this proceeding is 

terminated.

DATES: Effective January 3, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam 

Blumenthal, Media Bureau, (202) 418–

1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 04–253, 

adopted November 4, 2004, and released 

November 18, 2004. The full text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection and copying during regular 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC. This document may 

also be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC, 20554, telephone 301–

816–2820, facsimile 301–816–0169, or 

via e-mail joshir@erols.com.

This document does not contain [new 

or modified] information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public 

Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it 

does not contain any new or modified 

‘‘information collection burden for 

small business concerns with fewer than 

25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

The Commission will send a copy of 

this Report & Order in a report to be sent 

to Congress and the General 

Accountability Office pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Digital television broadcasting, 

Television.

■ Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows:

PART 73—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 73.622 [Amended]

■ 2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of 

Digital Television Allotments under 

Colorado, is amended by adding Greeley, 

DTV channel 45.

Federal Communications Commission. 

Barbara A. Kreisman, 

Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 04–26158 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P