Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29333

responsible facility official must

formally notify the registering entity. A

copy of such formal notification must be

kept on record by the responsible

facility official for a period of five (5)

years and is subject to paragraph (g) of

this section.

(j) Definitions. As used in this section:

Facility means any individual or

government agency, university,

corporation, company, partnerhship,

society, association, firm, or other legal

entity located at a single geographical

site that may transfer or receive through

any means a select infectious agent

subject to this part.

Registering entity means an

organization or state agency authorized

by the Secretary to register facilities as

capable of handling select infectious

agents at Biosafety Level 2, 3, or 4,

depending on the agent, in accordance

with the CDC/NIH publication

‘‘Biosafety in Microbiological and

Biomedical Laboratories.’’

Requestor means any person who

receives or seeks to receive through any

means a select infectious agent subject

to this part from any other person.

Responsible facility official means an

official authorized to transfer and

receive select infectious agents covered

by this part on behalf of the transferor’s

and/or requestor’s facility. This person

should be either a biosafety officer, a

senior management official of the

facility, or both. The responsible facility

official should not be an individual who

actually transfers or receives an agent at

the facility.

Secretary means the Secretary of the

Department of Health and Human

Services or her or his designee.

Select infectious agent means an

agent, virus, bacteria, fungi, rickettsiae

or toxin listed in Appendix A of this

part. The term also includes genetically

modified microorganisms or genetic

elements that contain nucleic acid

sequences associated with pathogenicity

from organisms on Appendix A, and

genetically modified microorganisms on

Appendix A, and genetically modified

microorganisms or genetic elements that

contain nucleic acid sequences coding

for any of the toxins in Appendix A, or

their toxic subunits.

Transfer (a) means the conveyance or

movement from a point of origination to

a point of destination either

(1) From one state or territory to

another or

(2) Entirely within one contiguous

state or territory.

(b) The term does not include intrafacility conveyances within a facility

located at a single geographical site

provided, that the intended use of the

agent remains consistent with that

specified in the most current transfer

form.

Transferor means any person who

transfers or seeks to transfer through any

means a select infectious agent subject

to this part to any other person.

§ 72.7 Penalties.

Individuals in violation of this part

are subject to a fine of no more than

$250,000 or one year in jail, or both.

Violations by organizations are subject

to a fine of no more than $500,000 per

event. A false, fictitious, or fraudulent

statement or representation on the

Government forms required in the part

for registration of facilities or for

transfers of select agents is subject to a

fine or imprisonment for not more than

five years, or both for an individual; and

a fine for an organization.

Appendix A to Part 72—Select

Infectious Agents

Viruses

1. Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever virus

2. Chikungunya virus

3. Ebola virus

4. Hantaviruses

5. Japanese encephalitis virsus

6. Lassa fever virus

7. Marburg virus

8. Rift Valley fever virus

9. Tick-borne encephalitis viruses

10. Variola major virus (Smallpox virus)

11. Yellow fever virus

12. South American Haemorrhagic fever

viruses (Junin, Machupo, Sabia, Guanarito,

and those yet to be decribed)

13. Encephalitis viruses (Venezuelan,

Western, Eastern)

14. Kyasanur Forest Disease virus

Exemptions: Vaccine strains of these viral

agents as described in the third edition of the

CDC/NIH ‘‘Biosafety in Microbiological and

Biomedical Laboratories’’ are exempt.

Bacteria*

1. Bacillus anthracis

2. Brucella abortus, B. melitensis, B. suis

3. Chlamydia psittaci

4. Clostridium botulinum

5. Francisella tularensis

6. Burkholderia (Pseudomonas) mallei

7. Burkholderia (Pseudomonas) pseudomallei

8. Yersinia pestis

Rickettsiae*

1. Coxiella burnetii

2. Rickettsia prowazekii

3. Rickettsia rickettsii

Fungi

1. Histoplasma capsulatum (incl. var

duboisii)

Toxins

1. Abrin

2. Botulinum toxins

3. Clostridium perfringens toxin

4. Corynebacterium diphtheriae toxin

5. Cyanginosins

6. Staphylococcal enterotoxins

7. Shigella dysenteriae neurotoxin

8. Ricin

9. Saxitoxin

10. Shigatoxin

11. Tetanus toxin

12. Tetrodotoxin

13. Trichothecene mycotoxins

14. Verrucologen

Exemptions: Toxins for medical use,

inactivated for use as vaccines, or toxin

preparations for biomedical research use at

an LD50 for vertebrates of more than 100

nanograms per kilogram body weight (e.g.,

microbial toxins such as the botulinum

toxins, tetanus toxin, diphtheria toxin, and

Shigella dysenteriae neurotoxin) are exempt.

Recombinant organisms/molecules

1. Genetically modified microorganisms or

genetic elements that contain nucleic acid

sequences associated with pathogenicity

from organisms on restricted list.

2. Genetically modified microorganisms or

genetic elements tht contain nucleic acid

sequences coding for any of the toxins on

the restricted list, or their toxic subunits.

*The deliberate transfer of a drug

resistance trait to microorganisms on this list

that are not know to acquire the trait

naturally is prohibited by HIH ‘‘Guidelines

for Research Involving Recombinant DNA

Molecules,’’ if such acquisition could

compromise the use of the drug to control

these disease agents in humans or veterinary

medicine.

[FR Doc. 96–14707 Filed 6–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–18–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[CS Docket No. 95–178; FCC 96–197]

Definition of Markets for Purposes of

the Cable Television Must-Carry Rules

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comment on transitional mechanisms to

facilitate the switch from a local market

definition based on Arbitron’s ‘‘Areas of

Dominant Influence’’ (‘‘ADIs’’) to one

using Nielsen’s ‘‘Designated Market

Areas’’ (‘‘DMAs’’) for purposes of the

cable television broadcast signal

carriage rules. The Commission

amended its rules to continue to use

Arbitron 1991–1992 ADIs to define local

markets for the triennial must-carry/

retransmission consent election that

must take place by October 1, 1996, and

to switch to Nielsen’s DMAs beginning

with the 1999 election in a Report and

Order adopted concurrently with the

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(‘‘Further NPRM’’) and summarized

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal

Register. The Commission previously

anticipated that updated market lists
29334 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules

would be available coincident with the

triennial must-carry/retransmission

consent election cycle. However,

Arbitron ceased publication of its

market lists. The Commission is

concerned that a change in market

designation procedures will affect a

greater number of stations, cable

systems, and cable subscribers than

would have been affected by simply

using a newer ADI market list, as had

been contemplated. Thus, the Further

NPRM provides an opportunity for the

Commission and affected parties to

further consider issues related to the

transition to a revised definition of local

markets. The Further NPRM also

requests comment on procedures to

refine the Section 614(h) ad hoc market

modification process in light of the new

statutory requirement that the

Commission act on such requests within

120 days.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

October 31, 1996, and reply comments

are due on or before November 15, 1996.

Written comments by the public on the

proposed and/or modified information

collections are due October 31, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

Secretary, a copy of any comments on

the information collections contained

herein should be submitted to Dorothy

Conway, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the

Internet to dconway@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marcia Glauberman or John Adams,

Cable Services Bureau, (202) 418–7200.

For additional information concerning

the information collections contained in

this FNPRM contact Dorothy Conway at

202–418–0217, or via the Internet at

dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CS

Docket No. 95–178, FCC 96–197

adopted April 25, 1996, and released

May 24, 1996. The full text of this

decision is available for inspection and

copying during normal business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (room 239),

1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC.

20554.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This Report and Order and Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking may

contain either proposed or modified

information collections. The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public to comment

on the information collections

contained in this Order/FNPRM, as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104–13. Public and

agency comments are due at the same

time as other comments on this FNPRM.

Comments should address: (a) Whether

the proposed collection of information

is necessary for the proper performance

of the functions of the Commission,

including whether the information shall

have practical utility; (b) ways to

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity

of the information collected; and (c)

ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on the

respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Synopsis of the Further Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking

1. The Further NPRM solicits

additional information and provides

parties an opportunity to further

consider issues relating to the transition

to market designations based on

Nielsen’s ‘‘Designated Market Areas’’

(‘‘DMAs’’). It also seeks comment on

procedures for refining the section

614(h) ad hoc market modification

process which allows the Commission

to modify the market areas of individual

stations and cable systems.

2. Under the signal carriage

provisions added to the

Communications Act (‘‘Act’’) by the

Cable Television Consumer Protection

and Competition Act of 1992 (‘‘1992

Cable Act’’), commercial broadcast

television stations are permitted to elect

once every three years whether they will

be carried by cable systems in their local

markets pursuant to the must-carry or

retransmission consent rules. Section

614 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 534, provides

that a station electing must-carry status

is entitled to insist on carriage of its

signal. A station electing retransmission

consent as set forth in section 325 of the

Act, 47 U.S.C. 325 negotiates a carriage

agreement with each cable operator and

may be compensated for its station’s

carriage.

3. For purposes of these carriage

rights, a station is considered local on

all cable systems located in the same

television market as the station. As

enacted in 1992, section 614(h)(1)(C) of

the Act required, through a crossreference to a Commission rule dealing

with broadcast ownership issues, that a

station’s market shall be determined

using the Arbitron Ratings Company’s

‘‘areas of dominant influence’’ or ‘‘ADI.’’

The rules adopted in 1993 to implement

these signal carriage provisions

established a mechanism for

determining a station’s local market for

each must-carry/retransmission consent

cycle based on ADI market lists. For the

initial election in 1993, Arbitron’s 1991–

1992 Television ADI Market Guide was

used to define local markets and for

each subsequent election cycle an

updated ADI market list was to be used.

4. However, since we established

these procedures, Arbitron left the

television research business and the

market list specified in the rules for this

year’s election is unavailable. Congress

also recognized that Arbitron no longer

publishes television market lists and the

Telecommunications Act of 1996 (‘‘1996

Act’’), Pub. L. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56

(1996), amended the definition of local

market that referenced ADIs.

Specifically, Section 614(h)(1)(C) of the

Act was amended by Section 301 of the

1996 Act to provide that for purposes of

applying the mandatory carriage

provisions, a broadcasting station’s

market shall be determined ‘‘by the

Commission by regulation or order

using, where available, commercial

publications which delineate television

markets based on viewing

patterns * * *.’’

5. In addition, section 614(h) of the

Act requires the Commission to

consider petitions for market

modifications to add communities to or

exclude communities from a station’s

local market based on historical

carriage, signal coverage, local service,

and viewing patterns. The 1996 Act

modified this provision to require the

Commission to act on all petitions for

market modifications within 120 days.

6. Prior to the 1996 Act, but consistent

with its amended definition of local

market, we issued the Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) in this

proceeding, summarized at 61 FR 1888

(January 24, 1996), seeking comment on

three proposals for revising the

mechanism for determining local

markets. First, the Commission could

substitute Nielsen Media Research’s

‘‘designated market areas’’ or ‘‘DMAs’’

for Arbitron’s ADIs. While similar in

many ways, the differences between

DMA and ADI market areas could result

in a change in the area in which a

station can insist on carriage rights and

a change in the stations that a cable

system is required to carry. The second

option would be to continue to use

Arbitron’s 1991–1992 Television ADI

Market Guide to define market areas,

subject to individual review and

refinement through the section 614(h)

process. Under this option, the local

market definition would remain

unchanged, subject only to future

individual market modifications. A

third proposal would be to retain the

existing market definitions for the 1996
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29335

election period and switch to a Nielsen

based standard for subsequent elections.

7. In this Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, we seek comment on

mechanisms for facilitating the

transition from a market definition

system based on ADIs to one based on

DMAs. We believe it will be useful to

consider various means of easing the

difficulties that may be associated with

what, as the comments indicate, will be

changes in the carriage requirements

applicable to many cable operators and

broadcasters. These changes potentially

affect mandatory carriage rights,

channel positioning obligations,

retransmission consent negotiations,

copyright payments, the expectations of

cable subscribers, programming

contracts, and even the physical layout

and construction of cable plant and

operations. Thus, by this Further NPRM,

we seek specific suggestions that would

assist in this transition process. In

particular, we ask commenters to

consider whether special provisions

should be made for particular types of

stations or systems to minimize the

disruptions that could occur due to a

switch to DMAs.

8. The Further NPRM also requests

comment on the consequences of a shift

in definitions on the more

particularized market boundary

redefinition process contained in

section 614(h) of the statute, the

decisions that have been made under

that section, and the proceedings under

it that would result from shifting market

definitions. We seek specific comment

on what changes in the modification

process might be warranted given that

administrative resources available to

process section 614(h) requests are

limited and the 1996 Act establishes a

120-day time period for action on these

petitions. Under the existing process, a

party is free to make its case using

whatever evidence it deems appropriate.

One means of expediting the

modification process might be to

establish specific evidentiary

requirements in order to support market

modification petitions under section

614(h) of the Act and § 76.59 of the

rules. Therefore, in the Further NPRM,

we propose several specific information

submission requirements and seek

comment on these and other alternatives

that parties believe will assist the

Commission in its review of individual

requests.

9. A second potential means of

increasing the efficiency of the decision

making process with respect to market

modification petitions would be to alter

to some extent the burden of producing

the relevant evidence. In particular, we

seek comment on whether the process

could be expedited by permitting the

party seeking the modification to

establish a prima facie case based on

historical carriage, technical signal

coverage of the area in question, and offair viewing, which could then trigger an

obligation on the part of any objecting

entity to complete the factual record by

presenting conflicting evidence as to the

actual economic market involved.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

10. Pursuant to section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, the

Commission has prepared the following

initial regulatory flexibility analysis

(‘‘IRFA’’) of the expected impact of

these proposed policies and rules on

small entities. 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 the Further

NPRM, but they must have a separate

and distinct heading designating them

as responses to the IRFA. The Secretary

shall cause a copy of the Further NPRM,

including the IRFA, to be sent to the

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration in accordance

with section 603(a) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, Pub. L. 96–354, 94 Stat.

1164, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (1981).

Objectives. The objective of the Further

NPRM is to solicit comments on ways to

ease the transition to a revised market

definition of local television markets

based on Nielsen’s DMAs for mustcarry/retransmission consent elections

beginning in 1999. We request

information that will permit us to

develop transitional mechanisms to

minimize problems that could result

from changing market designations on

broadcasters’ must-carry rights, cable

operators’ signal carriage obligations,

and the availability of local television

service to cable subscribers. The Further

NPRM also seeks comment on

requirements intended to make the

Section 614(h) market modification

process more efficient.

Legal Basis. Authority for this

proposed rulemaking is contained in

sections 4(i), 4(j) and 614 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j) and

534, and in section 301 of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.

L. 104–104 (1996).

Description, Potential Impact and

Number of Small Entities Affected.

Changing from a market definition

based on ADIs to one based on DMAs

could affect the area in which certain

small commercial broadcast television

stations are entitled to elect must-carry/

retransmission consent rights and

change the signal carriage obligations of

certain small cable systems. The further

NPRM requests proposals to minimize

the impact on such small entities as

well as other stations and cable systems.

Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements. None.

Federal Rules which Overlap,

Duplicate or Conflict with these Rules.

None.

Any Significant Alternatives

Minimizing Impact on Small Entities

and Consistent with Stated Objectives.

None.

Ex Parte

11. Ex parte Rules—Non-Restricted

Proceeding. This is a non-restricted

notice and comment rulemaking

proceeding. Ex parte presentations are

permitted, except during the Sunshine

Agenda period, provided that they are

disclosed as provided in the

Commission’s rules. See generally, 47

CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).

Comment Dates

12. Pursuant to applicable procedures

set forth in §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the

Commission’s rules, interested parties

may file comments on or before October

31, 1996, and reply comments on or

before November 15, 1996. To file

formally in this proceeding, you must

file an original plus six copies of all

comments, reply comments, and

supporting comments. If you would like

each Commissioner to receive a

personal copy of your comments and

reply comments, you must file an

original plus 11 copies. You should

send comments and reply comments to

the Office of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554.

Comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center, Room 239, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street NW., Washington DC 20554.

Ordering Clauses

13. Authority for this proposed

rulemaking is contained in sections 4(i),

4(j) and 614 of the Communications Act

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i),

154(j) and 534, and section 301 of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.

L. 104–104 (1996), part 76.

14. It is ordered that, the Secretary

shall send a copy of the Further Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking, including the

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, Pub. L. No. 96–354, 94

Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. §§ 601 et seq. (1981).
29336 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

Cable television.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–14567 Filed 6–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

47 CFR Part 76

[CS Docket No. 96–119; DA 96–833]

Cable Television Service; List of Major

Television Markets

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, through this

action, invites comments on its proposal

to amend its rules regarding the listing

of major television markets, to change

the designation of the Cedar RapidsWaterloo television market to include

the community of Dubuque, Iowa. This

action is taken at the request of Cedar

Rapids Television Company (‘‘CRTV’’),

licensee of television station KCRG–TV,

Channel 9, Cedar Rapids, Iowa and it is

taken to test the proposal for market

hyphenation through the record

established based on comments filed by

interested parties.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

July 22, 1996 and reply comments are

due on or before August 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa Stallings, Cable Services

Bureau, (202) 418–7200.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, CS Docket 96–

119, adopted May 20, 1996 and released

May 30, 1996. The full text of this

decision is available for inspection and

copying during normal business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington,

DC 20554, and may be purchased from

the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

(202) 857–3800, 1919 M Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20554.

Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

1. The Commission, in response to a

Petition for Rulemaking filed by the

petitioner, proposed to amend § 76.51 of

the rules to add the community of

Dubuque to the Cedar Rapids-Waterloo

television market.

2. In evaluating past requests for

hyphenation of a market, the

Commission has considered the

following factors as relevant to its

examination: (1) The distance between

the existing designated communities

and the community proposed to be

added to the designation; (2) whether

cable carriage, if afforded to the subject

station, would extend to areas beyond

its Grade B signal coverage area; (3) the

presence of a clear showing of a

particularized need by the station

requesting the change of market

designation; and (4) an indication of

benefit to the public from the proposed

change. Each of these factors helps the

Commission to evaluate individual

market conditions consistent ‘‘with the

underlying competitive purpose of the

market hyphenation rule to delineate

areas where stations can and do, both

actually and logically, compete.’’

3. Based on the facts presented, the

Commission believes that a sufficient

case for redesignation of the subject

market has been set forth so that this

proposal should be tested through the

rulemaking process, including the

comments of interested parties. It

appears from the information before the

Commission that the television stations

licensed to Cedar Rapids, Waterloo and

Dubuque, Iowa do compete throughout

much of the proposed combined market

area. Moreover, the petitioner’s proposal

appears to be consistent with the

Commission’s policies regarding

redesignation of a hyphenated television

market. Nevertheless, because the facts

before us indicate that KCRG–TV and

the stations licensed to Cedar Rapids,

Waterloo and Dubuque may, in fact, be

competitive, we believe that the

initiation of a rulemaking proceeding is

warranted. Proponents of amendments

to § 76.51 of our rules, however, should

be aware that the standard of proof to

change the rules is higher than the

standard to simply initiate a rulemaking

proceeding. Under these circumstances,

then, it may be helpful to receive

additional comment on the general

nature of any competition between

KCRG–TV and other stations in the

subject market for viewers,

programming and advertising revenues.

Accordingly, comment is requested in

particular on what consequences, if any,

result to the proposal from the addition

of Dubuque to the Cedar RapidsWaterloo, Iowa television market.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

4. The Commission certifies that the

Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does

not apply to this rulemaking proceeding

because if the proposed rule amendment

is promulgated, there will not be a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small business

entities, as defined by section 601(3) of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A few

cable television system operators will be

affected by the proposed rule

amendment. The Secretary shall send a

copy of this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, including the certification,

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration in

accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pub. L. 96–

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. section 601

et seq. (1981).

Ex Parte

5. This is a non-restricted notice and

comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex

parte presentations are permitted,

provided they are disclosed as provided

in the Commission’s Rules. See

generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203 and

1.1206(a).

Comment Dates

6. Pursuant to applicable procedures

set forth in §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the

Commission’s rules, interested parties

may file comments on or before July 22,

1996 and reply comments on or before

August 12, 1996. All relevant and timely

comments will be considered before

final action is taken in this proceeding.

To file formally in this proceeding,

participants must file an original and

four copies of all comments, reply

comments, and supporting comments. If

participants want each Commissioner to

receive a personal copy of their

comments, an original plus nine copies

must be filed. Comments and reply

comments should be sent to the Office

of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. Comments and

reply comments will be available for

public inspection during regular

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239) of the Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554.

7. This action is taken pursuant to

authority delegated by § 0.321 of the

Commission’s rules.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

Cable television.

Federal Communications Commission.

William H. Johnson,

Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau.

[FR Doc. 96–14568 Filed 6–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P