[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20586-20590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10176]



      

[[Page 20585]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Federal Communications Commission





_______________________________________________________________________



47 CFR Part 73



Broadcast Services; Children's Television; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 1995 / 
Proposed Rules
=======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
[[Page 20586]] 


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 93-48; FCC 95-143]


Broadcast Services; Children's Television

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice proposes a number of changes to the Commission's 
rules regarding the broadcast of television programming that serves the 
educational and information needs of children, in order to implement 
the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA) more effectively. First, 
the Commission proposes to require broadcasters to identify, on the air 
and in materials provided to publishers of broadcast schedules, 
programming ``specifically designed'' to educate and inform children. 
The Commission also seeks comment on ways to improve the quality of, 
and public access to, the information broadcasters make available 
regarding their efforts in providing children's educational and 
informational programming. Second, the Commission proposes to clarify 
its definition of ``educational and informational programming'' by 
adopting a definition of ``core'' programming. The Commission also 
seeks comment on which of three alternative options for further action 
should be implemented:
    Commission monitoring of the amount of educational and 
informational programming on the air during a specified period 
following adoption of measures to improve the flow of programming 
information to the public and a clarified definition; adoption of a 
safe harbor processing guideline specifying an amount of core 
programming that would satisfy the CTA; and adoption of a programming 
standard requiring that every station be responsible for the airing of 
a minimum amount of core programming in its market. The Commission also 
invites comment on possible new license renewal procedures and program 
sponsorship rules allowing licensees the option of meeting their 
programming obligation under the CTA in part by sponsoring core 
programming on other stations in their market. This action is taken to 
ensure that the educational and informational needs of children are 
satisfied and thus that broadcasters comply with the CTA.

DATES: Comments are due by June 16, 1995, and reply comments are due by 
July 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Conley, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
776-1653.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in MM Docket No. 93-48, FCC 95-
143, adopted April 5, 1995, and released April 7, 1995. The complete 
text of this NPRM is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 
2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rule Making

    1. Through this NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on several 
proposals aimed at providing licensees with clear, simple, and fair 
guidance regarding their children's programming obligation, to 
facilitate compliance with the Children's Television Act of 1990 (CTA 
or Act). The CTA was enacted to ``increase the amount of educational 
and informational broadcast television programming for children.''\1\ 
In response to this mandate, the Commission earlier adopted a Report 
and Order in MM Dockets 90-570 and 83-670 (56 FR 19611, April 29, 1991) 
and a Memorandum Opinion and Order in the same proceeding (56 FR 42707, 
August 29, 1991), establishing rules which implemented the CTA.

    \1\Children's Television Act of 1989, Senate Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, S. Rep. No. 227, 101st Cong., 
1st Sess. 1, 9 (1989) (``Senate Report'').
    The other provisions of the CTA, those intended to protect 
children from over commercialization of programming, are not at 
issue in this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The CTA imposes an affirmative obligation on broadcast 
television stations to serve the educational and informational needs of 
children through not only their ``overall programming,'' but also 
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's needs. The 
Act requires the Commission, in evaluating its licensees' license 
renewal applications, to determine whether stations have met this 
obligation. The CTA also authorizes the Commission, as part of its 
license renewal review process, to consider any special nonbroadcast 
efforts by the licensee that enhance the educational and information 
value of programming to children, and any special efforts by the 
licensee to produce or support programming specifically designed to 
serve the educational and informational needs of children that is 
broadcast by another station in the licensee's market. Our current 
rules generally incorporate the language of the statute and also define 
educational and informational programming as ``programming that 
furthers the positive development of children 16 years of age and under 
in any respect, including the child's intellectual/cognitive or social/
emotional needs.''\2\ In addition, we require broadcasters to air some 
amount of standard-length educational and informational programming 
specifically designed for children 16 years of age and under. The 
Commission has adopted no other guidelines regarding the types of 
programming that may contribute to satisfying a station's renewal 
review requirement, and our rules contain no requirement as to the 
number of hours of educational and informational programming that 
stations must broadcast or the time of day during which such 
programming may be aired.

    \2\47 C.F.R. 73.671 Note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. After developing some experience with the CTA, including the 
review of more than 320 television license renewals, the Commission 
issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) initiating this proceeding (58 FR 
14367, March 17, 1993) to examine whether its children's television 
rules should be revised. After careful consideration of the studies, 
comments, and other information regarding the availability of 
educational broadcast programming provided in response to the NOI and 
in connection with the FCC's en banc hearing on children's television 
held on June 28, 1994 (59 FR 22814, May 3, 1994), the Commission finds 
that this evidence is insufficient to support a conclusion as to 
whether or not the educational and informational needs of children are 
being met, including whether the CTA and our existing regulations have 
precipitated a significant increase in the amount of children's 
educational and informational programming carried by commercial 
broadcasters. In particular, none of the studies submitted enables us 
to determine accurately what amount of programming specifically 
designed to educate and inform children is currently being aired by 
commercial stations.
    4. Even if the Commission accepts the conclusion drawn by some 
parties that the amount of educational programming on the air has 
increased since implementation of our rules, the degree of that 
increase appears to be quite [[Page 20587]] modest at best. Thus, the 
Commission is not convinced that the current rules are prompting an 
adequate response to the CTA. Accordingly, the Commission feels that it 
would be desirable to precipitate a more substantial and significant 
increase in the amount of children's educational and informational 
programming--in particular, programming specifically designed to 
educate and inform children--in the future.
    5. In developing the rule revisions it proposes, the Commission has 
followed three principles. The first principle is that judgments of the 
quality of a licensee's programming, educational or otherwise, are best 
made by the audience, not by the federal government. It should not be 
necessary for the Commission to make such judgments if the public has 
sufficient programming information to play an active role in ensuring 
that the goals of the CTA are met. The provision of better programing 
information to the public should give parents and others the 
opportunity to influence broadcasters to air more educational 
programming--by, for example, encouraging children to watch educational 
programming and thereby increasing the ratings for such programming--
and should also facilitate enforcement of the CTA.
    6. To improve the flow of information to the public, the Commission 
proposes to require broadcasters to identify programs as educational at 
the time they are aired and in materials provided to publishers of 
television schedules. Such identifications need not take up large 
amounts of air time or print and could be as simple as an icon. 
Commenters are asked not only to discuss this specific proposal, but 
also to propose any additional methods for informing the public of 
upcoming children's programming. Comment is also sought on how to 
improve the quality of, and public access to, the information provided 
by stations regarding their efforts to provide programming specifically 
designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children. 
The Commission seeks comment on revising our existing rule requiring 
broadcasters to place in their public inspection files annual or 
quarterly reports about the children's programming they air. One 
suggested change is to require broadcasters to include in these reports 
the name of and method for contacting the person at the station 
responsible for collecting comments on the station's compliance with 
the CTA. The Commission further seeks comment on ways of rendering the 
required information in an easily understandable yet comprehensive 
form, and whether these reports should be required annually or 
quarterly or whether stations should continue to be allowed to choose 
between the two options.
    7. The second principle the Commission has followed is that our 
rules and processes should be as clear, simple, and fair as possible. 
To this end, the Commission proposes to revise our definition of 
``educational and informational'' programming. The current definition--
``programming that furthers the positive development of children 16 
years of age and under in any respect, including the child's 
intellectual/cognitive or social/emotional needs''--is ambiguous and 
fails to give licensees clear guidance. Indeed, some licensees have 
interpreted this definition to include general audience news and game 
shows. Moreover, the Commission has never defined what constitutes 
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational 
and informational needs, even though the CTA expressly requires each 
licensee to provide such programming. The Commission is concerned that 
this lack of clarity has led to less than optimal compliance with the 
goals of the CTA and that, unless greater specificity is provided, 
noneducational programming could drive educational programming off the 
air. The Commission therefore proposes to adopt a definition of 
programming specifically designed to serve children's educational and 
informational needs, i.e., ``core'' programming.
    8. The Commission tentatively concludes that we should define 
``core'' educational programming as those programs that meet the 
following requirements: (1) The program is specifically designed to 
meet the educational and informational needs of children ages 16 and 
under (i.e., has education as a significant purpose); (2) the 
educational objective of the program and the target child audience are 
specified in writing in the children's programming report described 
above; (3) the program is aired between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 
11:00 p.m.; (4) the program is regularly scheduled; (5) the program is 
of a substantial length (e.g., 15 or 30 minutes); and (6) the program 
is identified as educational children's programming at the time it is 
aired, and instructions for listing it as educational programming are 
provided by the licensee to program guides. The Commission seeks 
comment on this definition.
    9. The Commission's third principle is that broadcasters should be 
guided by market forces, to the greatest extent possible, in 
determining whether they meet their programming obligation by airing 
shows themselves, or by sponsoring programming aired on other stations. 
The program sponsorship concept, most relevant to the options discussed 
below of adopting processing guidelines or programming standards, would 
permit a broadcaster to better utilize other stations' children's 
programming expertise, would allow some stations to develop audience 
identification and programming schedules that build child audiences, 
and could stimulate growth in the production of educational and 
informational programming, all while reducing disincentives to airing 
such programming.
    10. While the Commission believes that the proposals to ensure that 
the public has greater access to information and to clarify the 
definition of educational and informational programming are important 
steps toward promoting the goals of the CTA more effectively, the 
Commission is concerned that these efforts may not suffice to serve the 
educational and informational needs of children, and to bring about the 
kind of measurable increase in such programming contemplated by 
Congress. Accordingly, the Commission also proposes to take one of the 
following three types of action.
    11. The first option available to the Commission would be to 
monitor the amount of broadcasted programming specifically designed to 
serve the educational and informational needs of children for a 
specified period of time (e.g., three years) to determine whether the 
Commission's efforts to increase the flow of information to the public 
and clarify our rules have caused a significant increase in such 
programming. Stations would be required to submit annual descriptions 
of their educational and informational programming. At the end of the 
specified period, the Commission would assess the need for further 
regulatory action.
    12. A second option would be to establish a safe harbor 
quantitative processing guideline. Such a guideline would specify an 
amount of core programming that would represent one means of satisfying 
the CTA's programming obligation and permit staff approval of the 
children's programming portion of a license renewal application. Under 
this option, if a licensee aired the prescribed amount of programming, 
its license renewal application would not be reviewed further for CTA 
programming compliance. The only challenges to a licensee's children's 
[[Page 20588]] programming performance that would be entertained would 
be those questioning the bona fides of a licensee's claim to have met 
the processing guideline. A licensee that did not meet the processing 
guideline would have its application referred to the Commission for 
consideration and would have the opportunity to demonstrate that it had 
complied with the CTA in other ways. The Commission would then evaluate 
such a licensee's performance based on its overall efforts and other 
circumstances. Failure to meet the guideline would thus result in 
greater review of the application, but would not constitute a de facto 
violation of the Commission's rules.
    13. Given the results of the studies submitted in the record thus 
far, and allowing for the possibility that these studies may be 
somewhat flawed, the Commission is currently inclined to think that, if 
a processing guideline is adopted, it should be set at 3 hours per week 
of core programming, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment 
on this suggestion and on whether, if a processing guideline is 
adopted, it should be increased in stages over time. If the Commission 
adopts a phased-in processing guideline, what should the ultimate level 
of the guideline be, and over what period of time should it be phased 
in? One possibility would be to increase the guideline by increments of 
the half hour each year until reaching a level of 5 hours of core 
programming per week.
    14. A third option would be to establish a standard requiring that 
every station be responsible for the airing of a minimum amount of core 
programming in its market. Stations meeting this requirement would 
qualify for staff approval of the children's programming portion of 
their license renewal application. Those not meeting the standard would 
have their applications referred to the Commission for determination of 
the appropriate remedy. Notwithstanding failure to meet the standard, 
the Commission could hold that the licensee had in fact complied with 
the CTA's requirements. However, a licensee failing to meet a standard 
would have a much heavier burden to show that it complied with the CTA 
than would be the case if it did not meet a processing guideline. Thus, 
a licensee failing to meet a standard would have to make a compelling 
showing that the qualifying programming it did air, along with any of 
its other programming-related activities in its market, served the 
educational and informational needs of children in that market as well 
as or better than an additional amount of programming specifically 
designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children. 
Again, the Commission believes that, given the current level of 
programming documented by the data submitted, the appropriate level of 
a programming requirement would be 3 hours of core programming per 
week, at least initially. The Commission seeks comment on this 
suggestion and, as with the option of a processing guideline, 
interested parties are invited to comment on whether it would be 
appropriate to increase the requirement by, for example, one half hour 
each year until a requirement of 5 hours of core programming per week 
is established. A programming standard, or rule, may be easier to 
administer and would give the Commission a broader range of sanctions 
than a processing guideline. The Commission solicits comment on these 
and other factors differentiating a processing guideline from a 
standard.
    15. There are a number of questions on which the Commission seeks 
comment that are raised by both the option of a safe harbor processing 
guideline and that of a programming standard. First, comment is sought 
on the Commission's suggestion of a weekly processing guideline or 
programming standard averaged over a specified period, and the 
Commission asks for ideas as to the period of time over which a 
guideline or standard should be averaged. The Commission also seeks 
comment on the extent to which repeats during a weekly schedule and 
later reruns of programs should be counted toward fulfillment of any 
processing guideline or programming requirement that might be adopted. 
Second, the Commission seeks comment as to whether a processing 
guideline or programming requirement should be the same for all 
stations regardless of station type or market size. Third, it has been 
publicly suggested that to give stations an incentive to air high-
quality programming, a programming requirement should be based entirely 
on a certain amount of rating points. The Commission invites comment on 
this suggestion and on whether it would be appropriate for either a 
processing guideline or a programming standard.
    16. Finally, interested parties are asked to provide the Commission 
with further data and related information. The Commission requests in 
particular detailed information regarding any potential opportunity 
costs (i.e., the difference in profits from children's educational 
programming and from other programming that might be aired instead) for 
broadcasters that would be created by the implementation of a 
processing guideline or programming requiring set at various levels. 
More specifically, the Commission requests that commenters provide us 
with one or more studies that quantify any such costs for stations in 
different sized markets, as well as for the broadcasting industry as a 
whole. The Commission urges commenters to ensure that the sample data 
used to develop estimates of any opportunity costs that stations might 
face are representative and that the methodology used to develop the 
estimates is clearly explained. The Commission also reiterates to all 
interested parties the importance of providing information and studies, 
in addition to those already on record, documenting changes in the 
nature and amount of children's educational programming on the air, 
especially recently. In providing such studies, commenters should bear 
in mind that the utility of the material already presented to us in 
this inquiry is limited. For example, the results of certain station 
surveys accept at face value station claims as to the educational 
consent of their programming, and our experience with such claims 
suggests that the figures produced by these studies may be inflated. 
The Commission notes that if data were submitted that show that the 
educational and informational needs of children are being met 
consistent with the goals of the CTA, we would reassess the need for 
further action.
    17. In weighing alternatives for further Commission action, the 
Commission must consider any limitations imposed by the First Amendment 
of the Constitution. Even assuming that the Commission's proposals were 
found to be content-based restrictions on speech, some restrictions on 
content have been judged permissible when applied to broadcasting 
because of the scarcity of frequencies and broadcasters' concomitant 
duty to provide public service. To be consistent with the First 
Amendment, content-based restrictions on speech in the broadcasting 
context must be narrowly tailored to further a substantial government 
interest. The Commission tentatively concludes, and the case law 
suggests, that the government has a substantial interest in furthering 
the education and welfare of children through implementation of the 
CTA. The courts have held that there is a compelling government 
interest in ``safeguarding the physical and psychological well being of 
a minor.''\3\ [[Page 20589]] The legislative history of the CTA states 
that ``[i]t is difficult to think of an interest more substantial than 
the promotion of the welfare of children who watch so much television 
and rely upon it for so much of the information they receive.''\4\ The 
Commission seeks comment on whether each of the proposed alternatives 
for improving implementation of the CTA is narrowly tailored to further 
the CTA's interest in furthering the education and welfare of children 
and on its analysis of First Amendment issues as discussed in 
paragraphs 66 through 73 in the full text of this NPRM.

    \3\Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 852 F.2d 1332, 1343 
n. 18 (D.C. Cir. 1988) and Supreme Court Cases cited therein.
    \4\Senate Report at 17; see also House Report at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. The Commission also seeks comment on possible revisions to our 
license renewal procedures that might encourage the public to take a 
more active role in urging stations to comply with the CTA and reduce 
the government's role in reviewing such compliance. Thus, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether it should require any party filing 
a petition to deny to show that he or she had first attempted to 
resolve the alleged problem with the station in question, and whether, 
if we implement a safe harbor processing guideline or a programming 
standard licensees should be permitted to certify whether they have 
aired the prescribed amount of core programming.
    19. Finally, the Commission solicits comment on a number of general 
and specific issues regarding ``program sponsorship'' rules. If the 
Commission adopts either a safe harbor processing guideline or a 
programming standard, such rules would give licensees the option of 
either themselves airing the entire prescribed amount of children's 
educational programming, or airing a portion of the prescribed amount 
themselves and taking responsibility for the remainder by providing 
financial or other ``in-kind'' support for programming aired on other 
stations in their market. The station sponsoring educational programs 
shown elsewhere would take credit for these programs at license renewal 
time. We conclude that the CTA precludes allowing a licensee to meet 
either a processing guideline or programming standard entirely by 
sponsoring programming on other stations in the same market. The 
Commission thus suggests that under either option each station be 
required to air at least 1 hour of core educational and informational 
programming itself and that each be allowed to fulfill the remaining 
hours by sponsoring core programming on other stations. The Commission 
also seeks comment on the tentative views expressed in the full text of 
the NPRM regarding how a program sponsorship system should work. The 
CTA and the Commission's rules already permit stations to receive 
credit at license renewal time for supporting educational programming 
on another station in their market, and the Commission has held that if 
one station produces or buys children's programs broadcast on another 
station, so as to qualify under 47 U.S.C. 303b(b)(2), both stations may 
rely on such programming in their license renewal applications. The 
Commission now seeks comment on whether that holding was correct, or 
whether it undermines the CTA by permitting ``double counting.'' It 
appears that, at least for the purpose of meeting a processing 
guideline or programming requirement, stations that air sponsored 
programming (``host'' stations) should not be permitted to claim credit 
for such programming.
    20. It is also the Commission's view that a station should be 
allowed to sponsor programs for the purpose of meeting a processing 
guideline or programming requirement only on host stations that serve 
largely the same potential viewers. On the other hand, the Commission 
does not believe that we should require sponsor and host stations to 
serve exactly the same area because such a requirement would unduly 
limit the program sponsorship options available in many markets. Taking 
into account these competing considerations, it would seem sensible to 
require that, when any portion of a station's programming that is 
claimed to satisfy a processing guideline or programming requirement 
consists of programming shown on another station, the signal of the 
host station cover 80 percent of either the community of license or the 
area encompassed within the grade A or grade B contour of the sponsor 
station. The Commission seeks comment on these ideas and on other 
issues relevant to program sponsorship. For example, the Commission 
asks for comment on what types of information about sponsored programs 
should be provided to the public, and whether antitrust law would limit 
the extent to which stations in a market may cooperate through program 
sponsorship efforts.
    21. If the Commission adopts either a processing guideline or a 
programming standard, we would intend that the resulting regulatory 
changes would be made on a provisional or experimental basis, rather 
than as permanent changes. It is the Commission's hope that any such 
guideline or standard, together with the other changes we propose, will 
effectuate a significant improvement in television broadcasters' 
service to children, and also will enable parents to monitor the 
performance of stations in their communities and ensure through their 
actions that the CTA's objectives are met. In accordance with these 
expectations, and to ensure periodic review of the necessity and 
efficacy of a guideline or standard, the Commission invites comment on 
whether to sunset any regulatory changes related to the possible 
implementation of either of these two options, absent additional 
Commission action, on December 31, 2004, unless affirmatively extended 
by the Commission. This date is one year after the close of the renewal 
cycle for the last group of stations to come up for renewal after rules 
would be adopted in this proceeding, and would allow the Commission, 
prior to the sunset, the opportunity to evaluate fully the effects of 
any rules adopted here. Thus, it would be our intention to undertake a 
review prior to the sunset date.
    22. In conclusion, with this proceeding, the Commission intends to 
enhance the public's ability to monitor station compliance with the 
CTA, to clarify its rules and policies governing educational 
programming for children to provide licensees with greater certainty as 
to the scope of their children's programming obligation, and to ensure 
that the amount of educational and informational programming provided 
by television broadcasters comports with the goals of the CTA. The 
Commission believes that these objectives can be achieved by increasing 
the flow of information to the public about the children's programming 
that stations are broadcasting, and by adopting a definition of 
programming ``specifically designed'' to serve children's educational 
and informational needs. In addition, we intend to take further 
action--in the form of instituting monitoring procedures, processing 
guidelines or a programming standard--in order to ensure that all 
children have access, as Congress intended, to an adequate supply of 
educational and informational programming specifically designed for 
them. The Commission seeks comment on all aspects of our proposals, and 
welcomes other ideas commenters may have to achieve the objectives 
outlined herein.

V. Administrative Matters

    23. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and 
1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested 
parties may file comments on or before June 16, 1995, and reply 
comments on or before July 17, 1995. To file formally in this 
[[Page 20590]] proceeding, you must file an original plus four copies 
of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want 
each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must 
file an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply 
comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 
Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available 
for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC 
Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20554.
    24. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking 
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the 
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the 
Commission Rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203 and 1.1206(a).

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement

I. Reason for the Action
    This proceeding was initiated to explore ways to implement the 
Children's Television Act of 1990 more effectively.
II. Objective of This Action
    The actions proposed in this NPRM are intended to give licensees 
clear, simple, and fair guidance regarding their children's programming 
obligation; to increase the flow of programming information to the 
public to facilitate enforcement of the Children's Television Act of 
1990; and to allow the marketplace to determine to the fullest extent 
possible the means that licensees use to meet their programming 
obligation. Other objectives are to increase the amount of available 
television broadcast programming that meets the educational and 
informational needs of children and to promote efficiency in the 
production and distribution of such programming.
III. Legal Basis
    Authority for the actions proposed in this NPRM may be found in 
Sections 1 and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 
U.S.C. 151, 303; and Section 103 of the Children's Television Act of 
1990, 47 U.S.C. 303b.
IV. Number and Type of Small Entities Affected by the Proposed Rules
    Approximately 1,200 existing commercial television broadcasters of 
all sizes may be affected by the proposals contained in this NPRM.
V. Reporting, Record-keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements 
Inherent in the Proposed Rule
    The NPRM seeks comment on modifying current record-keeping and 
reporting requirements to include a requirement that licensees 
demonstrate compliance with proposed rule changes in their children's 
programming report, and seeks comment on requiring licensees to make 
programming information more accessible to the public. The NPRM seeks 
comment on whether stations should be required to separate their 
children's programming reports from other material in the public 
inspection file and broadcast announcements to alert the public of the 
existence of such reports. It also seeks comment on a certification 
requirement that would replace the current requirement for submission 
of detailed documentation to the Commission for those stations able to 
certify that they have met a safe harbor processing guideline or 
programming standard.
VI. Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule
    None.
VII. Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small 
Entities and Consistent With the Stated Objectives of the Action
    The proposals contained in this NPRM are designed to encourage 
television broadcast programming that satisfies the requirements of the 
Children's Television Act of 1990, while minimizing the impact on small 
entities.
    25. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 
the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) of the expected impact on small entities of the proposals 
suggested in this document. Written public comments are requested on 
the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same 
filing deadlines as comments on the rest of this NPRM, but they must 
have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to 
the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Secretary shall send a 
copy of this Notice of Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a) 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 
U.S.C. Section 601 et seq (1981).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10176 Filed 4-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M