FCC 88·235 Federal Communications Commission Record 3 FCC Rcd No. 17
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
tour standard in the main studio location rule is necessary.
The positions of the parties and the Commission's decision
on these issues is discussed in detail belOW.
DISCUSSION
MM Docket No. 86·406
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
(Proceeding Terminated)
INTRODUCTION
1. On April 16, 1987, the Commission adopted its Re 
port and Order in the above-captioned proceeding,
amending the main studio fules governing television and
radio broadcast stations..
1
In., the Report and Order, the
Commission revised the main studio rules to conform
their requirements to broadcast station operations in the
current marketplace and regulatory environment..Specifi 
cally, the Commission amended the main studio location
rule to permit broadcast stations to locate their main
studios outside their communities of license at any point
within their principal community ("city grade") contours,2
and eliminated the station program origination rule in its
entirety. 3 However, to preserve the public's accessibility
to the station's public file, the Commission amended its
public inspection rules to provide that the licensee main 
tain the file within its station's community of license.
4
At
the suggestion of numerous parties commenting on the
Notice in this proceeding,S the Commission also added a
requirement that stations maintain a local or toll-free tele 
phone number if 'community residents will incur toll
charges in telephoning the station.
2. Now before the Commission for its consideration are
seven petitions requesting reconsideration and clarification
of this decision.
6
The petitions generally raise five issues:
(1) whether the Commission should modify its require 
ment that every station locate its public inspection file in
the community of license and maintain a local or toll-free
number if community residents would incur toll charges
in telephoning the station; (2) whether the main studio
has a function in light of the Commission's elimination of
the program origination rule and, if so, what is the func 
tion and how is main studio defined; (3) whether the
Commission should apply the main studio rule to non 
commercial educational stations; (4) whether the Commis 
sion should modify the main studio location standard; and
(5) whether clarification of the principal community con-
In the Matter of
A. Public File and Local I Toll· Free Telephone Require 
ments
3. The first issue raised by petitioners is whether' the
Commission should modify its new requirements that ev 
ery station locate its public inspection file in the commu 
nity of license and maintain a local or toll-free number if
community residents would incur toll charges in telephon 
ing the station. At the request of several petitioners,' the
Commission granted a limited stay of the revised public
inspection file rules on July 16, 1987 to permit those
stations that kept their public files outside the community
of license, either at the AM transmitter main studio site or
at a main studio location authorized by a previous rule
waiver, to continue to maintain their public files at those
locations pending a decision on this reconsideration.
8
4. Under the former public file rules, astation'~was
required to maintain the public inspection file at its main
studio or any accessible place in the community of li 
cense.
9
Under certain exceptions to the main studio loca 
tion rule, stations could locate their main studio, and thus
their public file, outside the community of license.
lO
In
this proceeding the Commission relaxed the main studio
location rule to permit a station to locate its main studio
outside its community of license.
ll
At the same time, the
Commission amended its public file rules to require that a
station locate' its public inspection file only in the commu 
nity of license.
12
The Commission also required a station
located outside the community of license to maintain a
local or toll-free number if community residents would
incur toll charges in telephoning the station.
13
5. Five of the seven petitioners and one commenter
objected to the Commission's require,ment that stations
maintain a public file in the community of license. Peti 
tioners urge modifications of, the public file rule ranging
from deleting the new requirement to grandfathering li 
censees that maintained their files outside the community
of license on the effective date of the new rules.
6. Petitioners The National Association of Broadcasters
(NAB), the Arkansas Educational Television Commission,
et aI. (Arkansas Commission, et aI.),14 Greater Media, Inc.
(Greater Media) and joint commenters WCKG, Inc. and
WVEC Television, Inc. (WCKG) urge the Commission to
return to its former public file rules under which a station
could locate its file at its main studio, irrespective of the
studio's location. The petitioners argue generally that the
Commission's new public file rules are more costly to the
stations, and disserve, rather than serve the public interest.
They assert that one of the same rationales that prompted
the Commission to relax the main studio rule -- reduced
travel time due to improved transportation systems that
may make a studio outside the community as accessible to
residents as a facility within the community -- similarly
supports permitting a station to maintain its public file at
its main studio.
7. They further argue that the Commission's goal of
reducing the stations' costs and creating efficiencies will be
frustrated because of the costs and burdens involved in
maintaining public files at a separate location.
1s
In addi 
tion, petitioners and commenters variously argue (1) that
RM-5480
Released: August 17, 1988
By the Commission:
Amendment of Sections 73.1125
and 73.1130 of the Commission's
Rules, the Main Studio and Program
Origination Rules for Radio and
Television Broadcast Stations
Adopted: Jnly 11, 1988;
5024
3 FCC Rcd No. 17 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 88-235
members of the pllblic expect [he files to be located at the
main studio, aHi wdib(~confused by a separate location;
(2) that licensees will have to rely on third parties to
maintain the files, who can easily misplat.:e files. ano. are
unable to answer the public's questions regarding the files;
(3) that IOCUli{JH of the fiies oll.tside the main studio will
inhibit the public from discussing infofmarion in the files
with the management or may require the public to travei
to two differentlocation~to inspect the files and discuss
them with r;:lanagCl"ltent, and (4) that licensees will have
problems keeping the files current.
8. If the Commission maintains its amended public file
rules. NAB. Pillar of Fire(Pil!~r)!'l.nd Knight Cnmmu 
ni:.::ations Corp.. Knight Radio, Inc. and Quality Radio
Corp. (Knight) urge the Commission to grandfather the
location of aU existing public files as of the effective date
of the new fuie. UtUJt:l this grandfather provision. all
licensees who were pceviously authorized to locate main
studios. including their public files, OL!tsi(le the community
of license would be permitted to continue to maintain the
public files at their existing location.
9. In support of the grandfather provision, pt::titioners
argue that (1) the new rule will confuse and incom:e 
nience members of tne public who are accustomed to
inspecting the files at the main studio: (2) relocation of
the files wiH be burdensome and costly for thelic~nsce~
who have traclitionally relied on rhe former rule to main 
tain their public files at the main studio: and (3) the rule
as it stands will prompt thousands of stations to seek
waivers of the ruie, imposing a tremendous hurden on
Commission resources.
16
Moreo\ier. pedtoners argue that it
is difficult tnrec-.J~cikthe new public file location re 
quirement with the rationale underlying the amendment
of the main studio loc:ltion rule. In this reg?rd. Pillar
argues that the Commission "seemingly ignored its rec 
ognition of modern accessibility." which supported the
decision to relax the main studio location rule, in adopting
the new requirement.
10. Onepetition~r.Arkansas Commission, el at., also
requests the Commission to eliminate the requirement that
each broadcast station maintain a local or toll-free tele 
phone number, asserting that it is costly and not suffi 
ciently justified.
11. Analysis. We have carefully considered petitioners'
arguments and we have further evaluated our new pUblic
file requirement. We have decided to maintain the public
file requirement as adopted in the Repon and Order, but
we will grandfather the location of public files established
outside of the community of license pursuant to exception
or waiver provisions in former Section 73.1125 (a) prior to
the effective date of the Report and Order.
12. Petitioners have not persuaded us to modify substan 
tially or to eliminate altogether our requirement that the
public file be maintained in the community of license.
Contrary to petitioners' assertions, this requirement is not
inconsistent with the Commission's relaxation of the main
studio location rule. We determined that public files must
be maintained in the station's community of license to
.,[t]o assure meaningful public participation in our licens 
ing process.'1l7 Notwith.standing the Commission's de 
regulatory measures, public participation continues to play
a significant role in the licensing process. For example,
although we eliminated extensive applications for license
renewal, we continue to rely on public participation in the
renewal process, among other enforcement tools, to insure
licensee compliance with Commission rules and policies.
18
Similarly. although we eliminated formal ascertainmept
requirements and quantitative prog.ramming guideiines, we
still rely on the public to insure that licensees fulfill their
obligation of providing programming responsive to the
needs and interests of their community of license.
19
The
informRtion needed by the public to monitor licensees'
performance is kept in the public files.
2Q
Thus, it is impor·
tant that the public files be physically accessible to all the
residents oi the station'sc~mmunityof license.
13 Moreover, the question of where the public file
should be located raises different issues than the matter of
the accessibility of the main studio. In our Report and
Order. we emphasized that locat.ion of the main studio in
the community of license Wrt$ no longer necessary to
assure that the station was accessible. A significant factor
in this determination was evidence that community resi 
dents generally communicate with a station by telephone
or mail, neither of which is dependent on location. In
contrast. a member of the community cannot review the
public files by phone Qf mail, but must go to where the
files are located. Thus, physical accessibility to the files is
more important them physical accessibility to t.he main
studio. We therefore believe that we should maintain the
requirement that public files be located in the community
of license.
14. We recognize that thisrequir~n1entmay impose
additional costs and administrati'\-'e burdens on licensees
who chose to locate their main studios outside the com 
munity of license. We continue to believe, however, that
we must maintain optimal accessibiiity to the public file
within the community of license.
15. For these samel"/~asons,.,,:e affirm our requirement
that licensees who are located outside the community of
license provide a local or toll-free numher if community
residents would incur charges in telephoning the station.
Central to our determination that a main studio outside
the community is accessible is the fact that it is reachable
by phone. The particular hardships suffered by the .single
petitioner who raised this issue are best addressed in the
context of a waiver application to the Commission.
16. We are persuaded, however, that it is in the public
interest to aHow licensees who have maintained public
files at main studios oUf-side the community of license,
pursuant to an exception or waiver under former Section
73.1125(a), to keep their files at their main studios. For
these licensees, we had previously determined that it was
appropriate. under given circumstances, to permit them to
locate main studios, along with public files, outside the
community of license. The same reasons that prompted us
to allow licensees to maintain main studios and public
files outside the community of license prior to amendment
of the rule apply equally under lhe amended rule. The
amendment to the main studio rule, which was designed
to relax the location requirement, should not operate to
impose more stringent requirements on licensees we pre 
viously had determined merited relief from the rule.
17. Significantly, accessibility of the main studio (as well
as the public files) was a consideration in formulating the
exceptions to, and granting waivers from the former rule.
Under the AM transmitter site exception (former Section
73.1125(.)). AM stations whose main studio was co 
located with its transmitter, and commonly-owned
AMIFM stations serving the same community whose main
studios were COR located with the AM transmitter could be
located outside the community of license?l This exception
rested on the determination that lIteehnical considerations
5025
FCC 88-235 Federal Communications Commission Record 3 FCC Red No. 17
governing AM transmitter site selection usually place such
sites in close proximity to the community of license."
22
Similarly, accessibility was a factor generally considered by
the Commission in determining whether waivers of the
main studio location requirement were in the public inter 
est under former Section 73.1125(a)(3).23 Thus, main stu 
dios operating under exceptions to or waivers from the
former rule were generally located immediately near the
community of license or at a site deemed readily acces 
sible to residents of the community by the Commission.
18. For these reasons, allowing licensees to keep their
public files at these studios will address petitioners' con 
cerns without offending the Commission's goal of afford 
ing community residents access to the files. We will
therefore modify amended Sections 73.3526 and 73.3527
of the Rules to allow ,tations that have been authorized to
.locate their main studios outside of the community of
license under Section 73.1125(a) prior to the effective date
of the Report and Order to continue to locate their public
inspection files at the main studio.
B. Main Studio Function
19. The second issue presented is whether the main
studio has a function in light of the Commission's elimina 
tion of the program origination rule and, if so, what is the
role of the main studio and how is it defined.
20. In the Report and Order, the Commission relaxed its
main studio rule to permit a station to locate its main
studio outside its community of license at any point within
its principal community contour.
24
At the same time the
Commission eliminated i.ts program origination rule,
which required a station to originate a minimum percent 
age of its programming from its main studio or other
points within its community of license.
2s
The Commission
reasoned in part that, due to changes in broadcast technol 
ogy and marketplace demands, the main studio no longer
plays a central role in producing the station's program 
ming. Consequently, the Commission determined that the
location of the main studio within the community of
license does not necessarily promote better programming.
21. Petitioners Arkansas Commission, et al. and Diocese
Telecommunications Corporation (DTC), along with com 
menters Boothbay Harbor Communications, Inc. (BHC),
assert that the elimination of the program origination rule
makes the role of the main studio unclear. Arkansas Com 
mission, et al. specifically assert that since no program 
ming need be originated in the main studio, the main
studio need be little more than a local office. They argue
further that, Il{i]n the absence of an articulated role for
the main studio, the significance placed on the location of
the main studio is without basis."
26
Accordingly, Arkansas
Commission, et al. urge the Commission to eliminate the
main studio rule altogether, at least for noncommercial
educational stations.
22. Alternatively, Arkansas Commission, et al., along
with Central Valley Communications, Inc. (CVe) and
BRC, stress the need for clarification of the role and
definition of a main studio. cve urges the Commission to
set minimum requirements for a main studio. BRC asks
the Commission for a clear statement as to the continued
need, if any, for a licensee to originate programming from
its main studio, or to maintain the capability to originate
programming.
23. Analysis. Contrary to petitioners' assertions, we did
not negate the role of the main studio when we eliminated
the program origination requirement. While program
origination has traditionally been a key function of the
main studio,27 it has not been its sole function. As we
repeatedly stressed in our Report and Order in this pro 
ceeding, the main studio is still expected to facilitate the
key function of serving the needs and interests of the
residents of the station's community of license. We specifi 
cally rejected proposals to eliminate the main studio rule
or adopt a "service area location standard
H
which would
have permitted some stations to locate their main studio at
a distance of over 100 miles from the'community of
license. Instead, we adopted a location standard for the
main studio that would extend additional flexibility to
broadcast stations "without affecting the station's ability to
meet its local service obligations."
2s
In sum, it is very clear
from the Report and Order that a primary function of the
main studio was and continues to be, even in the absence
of the program origination requirement, to serve the needs
and interests of the residents of its community of license.
We therefore reject petitioners' request on reconsideration
that we eliminate the main studio rule for the same rea 
sons we refused to eliminate the rule in the Report and
Order.
24. In response to petitioners' request that the Commis 
sion clarify the definition of and requirements for a main
studio, we offer the following clarification. A station must
maintain a main studio which has the capability ade 
quately to meet its function, as discussed above, of serv:ing
the needs and interests of the residents of the station's
community of license. To fulfill this function, a station
must equip the main studio with production and transmis 
sion facilities that meet applicable standards, maintain
continuous program transmission capability, and maintain
a meaningful management and staff presence.
29
Mainten 
ance of production and transmission facilities and program
transmission capability will allow broadcasters to continue,
at their option, and as the marketplace demands, to pro 
duce local programs at the studio.
3D
A meaningful manage 
ment and staff presence will help expose stations to
community activities, help them identify community needs
and interests and thereby meet their community service
requirements,31 The term "m.ain studio" continues to des 
ignate a broadcast station's only studio when no, auxiliary
studio is maintained. If a licensee has two or more studios
that meet the applicable criteria, it may select one (within
its community contour) to designate as its main studio.
C. Application oj the Main Studio Rule to Noncommer 
cial Educational Stations
25. The third issue raised by petitioners is whether the
Commission should apply the amended main studio rule
to noncommercial educational stations.
26. In the Report and Order, we stated that the main
studio requirements llhave applied, and will continue to
apply, absent waiver to noncommercial educational sta 
tions."32 Petitioners Arkansas Commission, el ,al., noncom 
mercial radio and television licensees, ask us to reconsider
this decision to apply the amended main studio location
rule to public broadcasters. Citing Commission decisions
from 1945, petitioners maintain that the Commission has
never imposed main studio and program origination re 
quirements on noncommercial educational FM stations,
and that the Commission's application of these require 
ments to noncommercial television stations has been
5026
3 FCC Red No. 17 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 88·235
"inconsistent. at best.,,33 They contend that "persuasive
reasons arising out of the nature and mission of public
broadcasting
ll
explain "the Commission's previous forbear 
ance in this area." and that these same reasons "require
the Commission to reconsider the Report and Order. ,,34
Specifically, they assert that the highest quality and most
responsive educational programming can generally be pro 
vided to an area by a station operating as part of a state or
regional network without its main studio. Petitioners argue
that through satellite stations in the areas, they increase
the reach of public television and radio, and achieve
economies of scale that permit them to enhance program 
ming. They contend that if they were required to operate
independently equipped and staffed stations at these sat 
ellite locations, as required under our main studio location
rule, areas would go unserved and resources would be
directed away from high quality programming.
27. In the event we determine that the main studio rule
applies to noncommercial educational stations, Arkansas
Commission el al. request us to confirm the validity of
waivers obtained by these stations under the former main
studio location rule to operate state or regional public
television and radio network stations using satellite sta 
tions. Petitioners also urge us not to require stations op 
erating under these waivers to create new public
inspection files or set up costly toll-free telephone systems.
Petitioners argue that such requirements would increase
the burdens on currently operating network and satellite
stations.
28. Analysis. We do not agree with Arkansas Commis 
sion, et at. that the public interest mandates a blanket
exception to the main studio location rule for public
broadcasters. Contrary to petitioners' assertions. the Com 
mission had, prior to this proceeding, applied the main
studio location requirement to all noncommercial educa 
tional stations. In 1979, we consolidated the main studio
location requirements governing broadcast stations and
placed them in Section 73.1125, a rule that by its terms is
applicable to all stations, commercial and noncommer 
cia1.
35
29. The thrust of petitioners' argument is that in con 
solidating the main studio requirements into Section
73.1125 the Commission applied these requirements to
noncommercial educational FM stations for the first time
without proper notice and comment Rule Making. Con 
trary to this assertion, the Commission has exercised regu 
latory 'oversight over the location of main studios of
noncommercial educational FM stations since 1947. when
the Commission adopted regulations governing the non 
commercial educational FM service.
36
rn any event, there
is no question that the Commission affirmed the imposi 
tion of the main studio requirement on all noncommercial
educational stations in its Report and Order in this pro 
ceeding.
30. To the extent that there are policy considerations
favoring exempting noncommercial educational stations
from the main studio location requirement, as petitioners
argue, we have traditionally addressed these on a case 
by-case basis through the waiver process. In the past, we
have recognized the benefits of centralized operations for
noncommercial educational stations, given the limited fun 
ding available to these stations, and we have granted
waivers to state and regional public television and radio
networks to operate "satellite" stations that do not nec 
essarily meet the requirements of a main studio.
37
These
stations, however, have not been permitted to ignore local
service obligations.3
8
and waivers generally have been
granted only upon a showing that the local community
would be served. Thus, all waivers issued prior to the
Report and Order in this proceeding, whether under the
waiver provision of the former main studio rule (Section
73.1125 (a)(3)) or pursuant to the original grant of a
license, are valid and will remain in effect as long as the
stations continue to operate under the terms of the waiver.
Moreover, noncommercial educational stations will con 
tinue to be able to seek waivers from the main studio
location rule either in the permit applications. or under
the same "good cause'! waiver standard applied under the
previous rules.
39
31. Finally, for reasons similar to those discussed in
paragraph 16, noncommercial educational stations, operat 
ing under waivers in effect on the date of the Report and
Order in this proceeding will not be required to create
new public inspection files within the community of li 
cense. However, absent a new waiver, such stations will be
subject to the local/toll-free telephone number require 
ment.
D. Modification of the Main Studio Location Standard
32. The fourth issue presented by petitioners on reconsi 
deration is whether the Commission should modify the
main studio location standard (1) to equalize its impact on
the different classes of FM stations and/or (2) to relax the
impact of the ['ule on noncommercial educational FM
stations.
33. As discussed above, we amended the main studio
location rule in the Report and Order to· require that all
broadcast stations. absent waiver or exception, locate their
main studios within their principal community contours.
34. eve asks the Commission to revise this standard to
permit stations to locate their main studios within 20
miles of their respective transmitters or within the princi 
pal community contour, whichever is greater.
4Q
CVC as 
serts that the present rule discriminates against these
stations because it allows Class B and Class· C FM stations
greater discretion in locating their studios than Class A
FM stations. cve notes that the principal community
contour of Class A stations extends for approximately 8
miles from the transmitter site, whereas the same contour,
for Class B stations is approximately 20 miles. Thus, the
modification requested by evc would essentially equalize
the impact of the rule on Class A and B stations. CVC
maintains that its proposal will" further the objectives un 
derlying relaxation of the main studio rule by permitting
Class A FM stations lito achieve efficiencies while still
serving their markets."41
35. DTC asks the Commission to revise the location
standard for noncommercial educational FM stations to
permit these stations to locate their studios anywhere
within their 60 dbu contours, rather than the 70 dbu
contour applicable to such stations under the new rule.
42
DTC asserts, in the alternative, that if the Commission is
unwilling to accept this 60 dbu contour for the more
powerful stations, it should at least allow small Class A
noncommercial educational FM stations to locate their
main studio within the 60 dbu contour. DTC asserts that
the present rule is not sufficiently flexible to permit small
noncommercial educational FM stations to benefit from
relaxation of the main studio location rule. Furthermore
DTC notes that the difference between a station's 70 dbu
contour and i.ts 60 dbu contour is "relatively minor ,11
4
3 and
"should not result in the remote studio location separa-
5027
FCC 88·235 Federal Communications Commission Record 3 FCC Red No. 17
tions which the Commission feared."
44
Finally, DTC rea 
sons that thi$ flexibility will not offend the Commission'$
goals because noncommercial educational stations, which
derive their funding .from community donations, cannot
ignore their community service roles.
36. Analysis. Petitioners have not persuaded us to alter
our previous determinatio.n that the use of the principal
community contour as the main studio location standard
for all broadcast stations strikes the appropriate balance.
37. In the Report and Order, we recognized that the
principal community contour standard would afford some
licensees greater flexibility than others. We adopted that
contour standard, nevertheless, because its use best bal 
ances our objectives. As we noted in the Report and
Order, it will permit co-location of the main studio and
transmitter in all cases, while at the same time ensuring
that the main studio is located in the primary reception
area of the station.
45
Petitioners may· be correct in assert 
ing that, in their particular cases, they could operate their
main studios beyond the principal community contour
standard and still meet their local service obligations.
However. this does not alter our determination that the
balance we have struck is appropriate in most cases. If the
rule creates inequities in particular situations, the appro 
priate 'recourse, rather than mOdifying the rule to fit par 
ticular facts, is for the station to seek a waiver. The "good
cause.
1I
waiver standard is retained in the amended rule.
46
38. In sum, all stations, absent waiver or exception, will
continue to be required to locate their main studios within
the principal community contour.
E. Clarification of the Principal Community Contour
Standard
39. The final issue raised by the petitioners is whether
clarification of the principal community contour standard,
as used in the amended main studio location rule, is
necessary.
40. In its Report and Order, the Commission stated that
the principal community contours for AM, FM and televi 
sion broadcast stations are found in Sections 73.240),
73.315(a) and 73.685(a), respectively. The Commission
noted that the daytime contour requirement of Section
73.240) will be applicable to AM stations, and the contour
in Section 73.315(a) will be applicable to noncommercial
educational FM stations.
47
41. NAB asks the Commission to define the principal
community contour standard with greater precision· by
clarifying whether the main studio must be located within
a station's actual or its predicted principal community or
"ci.ty gradeII contour. NAB notes that a station's actual
contour may be farther from thestation·s transmitter than
its predicted contour, or vice versa. In clarifying the defi 
nition, NAB urges the Commission to permit licensees to
choose the contour, either actual or predicted, which gives
them the greater flexibility in locating their main studio.
NAB asserts that this would be consistent with the Com 
mission's decision to amend the main studio location rule
to accord licensees greater flexibility in locating their main
studios.
42. Analysis. In resportse to NAB's request, we clarify
below the definition of principal community contour as it
·applies in our amended main studio rule.
43. The Commission's rules provide that the principal
community Clcity grade") contour is the contour that
encompasses the minimum field .strength a station is re-
quired to place over its community of license. Every sta 
tion in the AM, commercial FM, and television broadcast
services is required to demonstrate compliance with a
minimum field strength requirement in its initial construc 
tion permit application or application for change in facili- .
ties affecting that contour.
48
Generally, stations plot only,a
predicted field strength contour, determined in accordance
with our rules. to ,demonstrate compliance. For. these sta 
tions, this predicted contour is the applicable principal
community contour under our rules.
44. For AM stations, it is possible to establish a princi 
pal community contour based on actual. rather than pre 
dicted field strength.
49
If a licensee of an AM station uses
actual field strength to establish the station's community
contour in its initial construction permit application or
application for change of facilities, a contour based on
actual measurements is the station's applicable contour
under our rules. Unlike AM service. there is no method
for locating a principal community contour by actual mea 
surements for FM or television service.
50
Thus the princi 
pal community contour for FM (commercial and
noncommercial educational) and television stations is
based on the predicted ,field strength in all cases. 51
45. Since a principal community contour for AM sta 
tions can be defined by actual or predicted field strength,
a licensee .of an AM station may locate its main studio
within a,contour established by either; actual or predicted
measurements.·If an AM licensee ustM'-a'predicted contour
in its initial construction permit application, but wishes to
rely on actual measurements in relocating a main studio
under the amended rule. the licensee must comply with
Section 73.186 of our' rules. Since there is no method for
locating a principal community contour based on actual
measurements for FM (commercial and noncommercial
educational) and television stations. the applicable contour
for locating a main studio of an FM' or television station
under the amended rule is the predicted contour in all
cases.
46. This clarification is 'consistent with our rules and
allows licensees the greatest flexibility possible in locating
main studios given the constraints in establishing a princi 
pal community contour for FM and television services
based on actual measurements.
CONCLUSION
47. After carefully reviewing the petitions. for reconsi 
deration and clarification, we believe the public interest is
best served by implementing the main studio and 'public
inspection file requirements. as adopted in the Report and
Order and modified herein.
PROCEDURAL MATTERS
48. The requirements contained in this Memorandum
Opinion and Order. have been analyzed withresp~ctto the
Paperwork ReductIOn Act of 198<1'2 and found to contain
no new or modified form, information collection andlor
record keeping. labeling, disclosure. or record retention
requirements; and will not increase or decrease burden
hours imposed on the public.
49. The Secretary shall cause a copy of this A1emoran
M
dum Opinion and Order, including the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis which is set forth in Appendix B, to be
sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
5028
3 FCC Rcd No. 17 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 88·235
Business Administration, in accordance with Section 604
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pub. L. No. 96-354, 94
Stat. 1164 (codified at 5 U.S.c. Sections 601-612 (1982)).
50. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED. THAT Part 73 of
the Commission's Rules and Regulations is amended as
described above and as set forth in Appendix A below.
51. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, THAT the petitions
for reconsideration and/or clarification ARE GRANTED
to the extent indicated herein, and in all other respects,
ARE DENIED.
52. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, THAT pursuant to
the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.c. Section
553(d)(I), the amendments to the Commission's Rules and
Regulations shall become immediately effective upon pub 
lication in the Federal Regisler.
53. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, THAT the limited
stay of the revised public inspection file rules adopted on
July 16, 1987 IS RESCINDED.
54. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, THAT this proceed 
ing IS TERMINATED.
55. Authority for the action taken herein is contained in
Sections 4(i) and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, and Section 1.429 of the Commission's Rules.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
H. Walker Feaster, III
Acting Secretary
APPENDIX A
Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154 and 303.
2. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraph (d)
to read as fo Haws:
Section 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commer 
cial stations. '
* * * * *
(d) Location of records. The file shall be maintained at
the main studio of the station, where such studio is lo 
cated in the community to which the station is licensed or
where such studio is located outside of the community of
license pursuant to authorization granted under Section
73.1125(a) of the rules prior to July 16, 1987, or at any
accessible place (such as a public registry for documents
or an attorney's office) in the community to which the
station is or is proposed to be licensed. The file shall be
available for public inspection at any time during regular
business hours.
'1< * ". * >i<
3. Section 73.3527 is amended by revising paragraph (d)
to read as follows:
Section 73.3527 Local public inspection file of noncom 
mercial educational stations.
'1< * * * *
(d) Location of records. The file shall be maintained at
the main studio of the station, where such studio is 10
M
cated in the community to which the station is licensed or
where such studio is located outside of the community of
license pursuant to authorization granted under Section
73.1125(a) of the rules prior to July 16, 1987, or at any
accessible place (such as a public registry for documents
or an attorney's office) in the community to which the
station is or is proposed to be licensed. The file shall be
available for public inspection at any time during regular
business hours.
* * * * *
APPENDIX B
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. Need for and Purpose of this Action. In the Report
and Order in this proceeding, the Commission amended
its rules to: (1) permit all broadcast stations to locate their
main studios within their principal community contours;
(2) allow broadcast stations to originate programming
from any location; and (3) require broadcast stations to
maintain a local or toll-free telephone number and to
keep their public inspection files in their communities of
license, The Commission concluded therein that these
amendments would afford broadcasters more flexibility
and permit them to realize greater efficiencies without
altering current local service obligations or affecting a
licensee's ability to meet those obligations.
In the attached Memorandum Opinion and Order, the
Commission reaffirmed the amendments adopted in the
Report and Order, but grandfathered the location of public
inspection files that were maintained by stations outside
the community of license prior to the effective date of the
Report and Order. The Commission concluded that this
refinement of the order is consistent with the Objectives of
the earlier decision and will reduce the administrative
burden on stations that had located public files outside the
community of licen.se prior to the Report and Order,
2. Issues Raised in Response to the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis. No party to this proceeding raised any
issue specifically in response to the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis contained in the Notice of Proposed
Rule Making or the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
contained in the Report and Order.
3. Significant Alternatives Considered and Rejected. As
noted in the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in the Report
and Order, the Commission carefully considered the sig 
nificant alternatives presented in this proceeding before
reaching its final determination to revise the rules as
adopted therein. The Commission continues to believe
5029
FCC 88-235 Federal Communications Commission Record 3 FCC Red No. 17
that these amendments, as refined in the lvlemorandum
Opinion and Order on reconsideration, provide relief to
broadcasters consistent with Commission objectives.
FOOTNOTES
1 See Amendment of Sections 73. 1125 and 73. 1130 of the
Commission's Rules. Report and Order in MM Docket86~406.
FCC 87-137, 2 FCC Red 3215 (1987) [hereinafter Report and
Order J. The amended rules aTe published at Broadcast Services.
Amendment ojthe Main Studio Location and Program Origination
Rules jar Radio and Television Broadcast Stations, S2 FR 21684
(June 9. 1987) (codified at 47 C.F.R. Parts 0 & 73).
2 See 52 FR 21684 (June 4. 1987) (codified at 47 C.F.R. § .
73.1125 (1987».
3 The fonner program origination rule was found in Section
73.1130. That rule required that every broadcast station originate
more than SO percent of its non-network programs from its main
studio or other points within its communityof license.
, See 52 FR 21684 (June 9, 1987) (codified at 47 C.F.R. §§
73.3526(d) and 73.3527(d) (1987)). In an order adopted 00 July
16, 1987, the Commission granted a limited stay of the revised
public inspection file rules. See Memorandum Opinion and Order.
FCC 87-248 (released July 17, 1987). summarized. 52 FR 28825
(August 4, 1987).
5 See, e. g., Comments of the National Association ofBroad~
casters (NAB) at 2: Comments of Brown Broadcasting Company
at 5; Comments of the Pappas Telecasting Companies at 3: Com 
ments of Western Broadcasting Corporation of Puerto Rico at 6;
Comments of May & Dunne, Chartered at 7; and Comments of
The Ohio University, The Miami University, Northern Michigan
University, Washington State University, and the Ohio Educa 
tional Broadcasting Network at 5.
6 Petitions for reconsideration were filed by: (1) The Arkansas
Educational Television Commission, filed jointly with the Iowa
:Public Broadcasting Board, Lehigh Valley Public Telecommunica 
tions Corporation, Nebraska Educational Telecommunications
Commission, South Carolina Educational Television Commission,
State of Wisconsin~Educational CommunicationsBoard, Univer 
sity of Maine System. West Central Illinois .Educational
Telecommunications Corporation. and WSKG Pubhc Telecom
w
munications Council (Arkansas Commission. et al.): (2) Central
Valley Communications,lnc. (CVe): (3) Diocesan Telecommuni
w
cations Corporation, Inc. (DTC): (4) Greater Media, Inc. (Greater
Media); (5) Knight Communications Corp., filed jointly with
Knight Radio, Inc. and Quality Radio Corp. (Knight): (6) NAB:
and (7) Pillar of Fire (Pillar). In addition, the Commission re 
ceived comments in support of the petitions from Boothbay Har 
bor Communications, Inc. (BHC) and from WCKG, Inc. and
WVEC Television, Inc. (WCKG). No pleadings were filed in
opposition to the petitions.
7 Requests for a stay of the revised rules'were filed by the NAB
and Greater Media, Inc. A motion was also filed by Knight
requesting a limited stay of the same rules. Although the Com 
mission found that the petitioners had not made the requisite
showing to warrant grant of the stay request under the applicable
standard, the Commission in its own discretion granted a limited
stay pf the revised public inspection rules.
8 See Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 87
w
248 (released
July 17. 1987), summarized. 52 FR 28825 (August 4, 1987).
9 See former Sections 73.3526(d) and 73.3527(d), 47 C.F.R. §§
73.3526(d) and 73.3527(d) (1986).
to Seeforme~Section 73.1125(a). 47 C.F.R. § 73.1125(a) (1986).
11 See Report and Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3218, 3221
w
22.
12 [d. at 3218, 3222.
13 [d.
14 See note 2 supra.
15 For example, Arkansas Commission. et al. note that the
Nebraska Educational TelecommunicationsCommission estimates
that it will cost $12,000 annually to maintain separate files for its
nine stations. a figure which includes duplication expenses and
travel costs to upkeep the files on a monthlybasis.
16 These specific concerns were raised by WCMS Radio Nor
w
folk, Inc. (WCMS) in a request for waiver of the new require 
ment, a copy of which was submitted by WCMS forconside~ation
in this proceeding. WCMS also asserts that relocation of the file
from the main studio might result in less effective access because:
(1) station personnel would not be available to answer questions;
(2) the custodian of the file might be less diligent than station
personnel in maintainingthe file; and (3) the possible time delay
in getting information to the file.
11 See Report and Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3218.
18 See Radio Broadcast Services : Revision of Applications for
Renewal of License of Commercial and Noncommercial AM, FM,
and Television Licensees. 49 RR 2d 740, recon. denied, 87 FCC 2d
1127 (1981), aff' d sub nom, Black Citizens for a Fair Media v.
FCC, 719 F.2d 407 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
19 See Deregulation of Radio, 84 FCC 2d 968. recon. denied in
part, 87 FCC 2d 797 (1981), aff d in part and remanded inp~rt
sub nom. Office of Communication Of the United Church oj Chnst
v. FCC, 707 F.2d 1413 (D.C. Cir. 1983): Revision of Programming
and Commercialization Policies, Ascertainment Requirements, and
Program Log Requirements jor Commercial Television Stations, 98
FCC 2d 1076 (1984). recon. denied, 104 FCC 2d 357 (1986), aff'd
in part and remanded in part sub nom. Action for Children's
Television v. FCC, 821 F.2d 741 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
20 In the radio and television deregulation proceedings, the
Commission implemented a new issues-programslist requirem,ent.
This record keeping requirement, which was refined during the
proceedings, provides that a licensee, on a .quarterly basis, must
compile a list of programs that have provided the station's most
significant treatment of community issues during the preceding
three month period and place that list in its local public inspec·
tion file. See Office of Communication of the United Church of
Christ v. FCC, 707 F.2d 1413 (D.C. Cir. 1983). Deregulation of
Radio, 96 FCC 2d 930 (1984) (revising issueswprograms list re
w
quirement), remanded sub nom. Office of Communicati?n Of the
United Church of Christ v. FCC, 779 F.2d 702 (D.C. Clr. 1985):
Deregulation of Radio, 104 FCC 2d 50S (1986) (revisingissues~
programs list requirement). The Commission has proposedco~­
forming the issues-programs list requirement for noncommercIal
licensees to the requirement adopted for commercial stations. See
Revision of Section 73.3527(a)(7) relating to the Issues-programs
Listfor Public Broadcasting Licensees, 2 FCC Rcd 507 (1986).
2t See 47 C.F.R. § 73.1125(a)(I)-(a)(3) (1986).
22 FM-TV Main Studio Moves, 27 FCC 2d 851, 853 (1971).
23 See, e.g., Central Virginia Educational Television Corp., 49
RR 2d 435 (1981): Jersey Cape Broadcasting Corp., 85 FCC 2d
654 (1981).
24 See Report and Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3218.
2S [d. at 3218-19.
26 Arkansas'Commission, et al. Petition for Reconsideration at
10.
27 The main studio,rule was based in part on the premise that a
studio's location in the community would foster responsive
communitywbased programming. The program origination rule
was adopted to complement the main studio requirement. It was
premised on the notionth~tif a significant amount of program
w
5030
3 FCC Red No. 17 Federal Communications Commission Record
FCC 88-235
DTC Petition for Reconsideration at 5.
44 DTC Petition for Reconsideration at 6. As an alternative,
DTC suggests liberalizing the waiver process for educational FM
stations. DTC states that a "waiver should be permitted if a
station can show that by locating outside of its principal commu 
nily contour, it will continue to offer reasonable access and
provide programming to meet local needs." hi. at q.
45 See Report and Order, 2 FCC Red at 3218.
"See 52 FR 21685 (1987) (codified at 47 C.F.R. § 73.ll25(a)(4)
(1987)).
01 7 See Report and Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3224 n.lO.
018 See 47 C.F.R. Sections 73.24{j), 73.315(a) and 73.685(a)
(1987).
..\9 See 47 C.F.R. Sections 73.183 and 73.153 (1987).
50 Although the rules permit FM stations to use field strength
data to determine whether FM broadcast service encompasses
specific communities, see 47 CFR Sections 73.314 and 73.315(d)
(1987), an entire contour cannot be located under the rules by
actual measurements.
51 As stated in the Report and Order, the principal community
contour for noncommercial educational stations is that applicable
to FM commercial stations. 2 FCe Rcd at 3224 n.lO. DTC
questions whether the reference in note 10 of the Report and
Order to Section 73.315(a) to describe the contour to be used by
noncommercial educational FM stations imposed a principal city
coverage requirement. It did not. That reference was made solely
to indicate the applicable main studio location standard for the
stations.
52 Federal Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.c. Sections
3501-3520 (1984 Supp.).
ming originated in studios located within a community, this
would result in locally-oriemedprogramming. Report and Orde,.,
2 FCC Red at 3217- 19.
28 [d. at 3214.
29 See, e.g., Pappas Telecasting of the Carolinas, 60 RR 2d 1394,
1400 (1986). However, licensees who are operating main studios in
a manner inconsistent with lhis definition pursuant to a waiver
granted under Arizona Communications COlp., 17 fCC 2d 283
(1971), commonly referred to as an Arizona prior to the Report
and Order, are permitted to continue to operate their main studio
in the manner authorized in the waiver. This exemption from the
main studio rule applies as long as a licensee operates a main
studio in the same location and pursuant to the conditions set
forth in the waiver. Should a licensee change the location of a
main studio covered by a waiver, the exemption no longer ap 
plies.
30 Report and Order, 2 FCC Red at 3218.
31 [d.
32 [d. at 3224 n.10.
33 Arkansas Commission's Petition for Reconsideration at 6.
3J [d. at 6-7.
35 See Regulations and Rules Oversight of the AM, FM and TV
Broadcast Rules, 44 FR 69,933 (1979). Accord Central Virginia
Educational Television Corp., 49 RR 2d 435 (1981) (waiver of
main studio location rule granted to noncommercial educational
television station).
36 See Noncommercial EducationalFl~'[Broadcast Stations, 12
FR 1369 (1947). Petitioners incorrectly contend that these rules
did not contain a main studio requirement. Section 3.557 of these
rules provided that a station must receive Commission authority,
through formal application, for a "[c]hange in location of main
studio, if it is proposed to move the main studio to a different
city from that specified in the license." 12 FR at 1332.
37 See, e.g., Nebraska Educational Television Commission, 4 RR
2d 771 (1965).
38 See, e.g., Georgia State Board of Education, 70 FCC 2d 948
(1979).
39 See 52 FR 21685 (1987) (codified at 47 C.F.R. § 73.ll25(a)(4)
(1987)).
40 eve is the licensee of two radio stations, an AM station and
a Class A FM station, licensed to communities approximately 16
miles apart. evc maintains that the present rule does not permit
it toco~locateits studios at the AM station's main studio site
because the principal communitycontour of the FM station does
not extend over that site.
41 CVC Petition for Reconsideration and/or Clarification at 4.
42 See Report and Order 2 FCC Rcd at 3224 n.10. DTC is the
licensee of a noncommercial Class A educational station licensed
to Robstown, Texas. It utilizes the studio of the Telecommunica 
tions Center of the Diocese of Corpus Christi located in Corpus
Christi as an auxiliary studio. The Robstown station is an affiliate
of the Catholic Telecommunications Network of America,
(CTNA). CTNA programming is received at and distributed from
the Corpus Christi facility. DTC asserts that it would achieve
significant operating efficiencies if it could consolidate its oper 
ations at the Corpus Christi facility. DTC notes that such consoli 
dation is not possible under the present rule because the Corpus
Christi facility is 1.8 miles outside the Robstown station's 70 dbu
contour, but would be possible if a 60 dbu contour standard were
adopted.
<13 DTC notes that the 70 dbu and 60 dbu contours for the
various class FM stations extend approximately to the following
distances:
5031
Class
A
BI
Band C2
CI
C
70 dbu (miles)
8,43
14.35
20.21
30.96
41.88
60 dbu (miles)
15
22.35
32.21
~4.94
57.08