In the Matter
of CARRIER-CURRENT RADIO SYSTEMS OPERATING PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.7 OF THE
COMMISSION'S RULES AND LOW-POWER COMMUNICATIONS DEVICES OPERATING PURSUANT TO SUBPART
E OF PART 15 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES
Docket No. 19092
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
28 F.C.C.2d 357
RELEASE-NUMBER: FCC 71-312
April 9, 1971 Released
Adopted March 24, 1971
JUDGES:
BY THE COMMISSION: COMMISSIONER
HOUSER CONCURRING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT IN WHICH COMMISSIONERS BURCH,
CHAIRMAN, ROBERT E. LEE, AND WELLS JOIN; COMMISSIONER BARTLEY NOT
PARTICIPATING; COMMISSIONER JOHNSON DISSENTING AND
ISSUING A STATEMENT.
OPINION:
[*357] 1. Notice
of Inquiry and Proposed Rule Making in the above entitled matter is hereby
given.
2. There presently exist under
Part 15 of the Commission's Rules provisions permitting the operation of
restricted radiation devices on standard broadcast frequencies with low
strength signals, subject only to the technical operational limits set forth in
the applicable sections of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules. One type of
device is the carrier-current system which is operated pursuant to Section 15.7
(47 CFR § 15.7) n1; these self described "college
radio stations" have been chiefly popularized and used on college
campuses, although we are informed that many high schools as well as other
institutions operate such stations. Another group, categorized generally
as low power communications devices, are miniature transmitters operating under
Subpart E of Part 15, and our recent experience indicates that these devices
have been operated mostly by hobbyists who emulate broadcast station
formats.
n1 The operation of carrier-current
devices is described more fully in para. 4, infra.
3. In both of the foregoing
types of operation, the Commission has assumed that the low power restrictions
provided in Part 15 would ensure that prospective recipients of the radiated
signals would be confined to those in close proximity to the transmitting
source, thus limiting the impact of such operations on the general public and
conventional broadcast stations. However, the Commission has become aware
of various designs to expand the coverage of both types of operation, the
expansion to be effected through interconnection methods.
[*358] One development involving carrier-current radio occurred in
October 1969, when the Commission was approached by carrier-current radio
systems WJC, Juniata College, and WFIB, University of Cincinnati, with requests
for authority to expand their respective activities beyond the area of the
immediate college campus. In the case of WJC, the system proposed to have
its signal picked up by a local CATV system and distributed to the general
public. n2 In the case of WFIB, the system
proposed to feed the signal of its station, via AT&T lines, to other
college radio systems throughout the country, thereby establishing a
carrier-current radio network. n3
Another illustration of carrier-current system proposals in seen in an article
in the February 28, 1970, edition of Billboard Magazine (p. 34) which described
the proposal of WBCR, the carrier-current radio system of Brooklyn College, to
locate interconnected carrier-current transmitters carrying the programs of
WBCR over a large area in local businesses, banks, etc. In the area of
low power communication not involving carrier-current systems, the Commission
was advised of the efforts of one group to organize a 25 station (or more)
network of restricted radiation devices which would simultaneously transmit
programs throughout the New York City area. Thus, we have seen Part 15
devices of several types develop into integrated communication facilities
capable of reaching significant numbers of listeners.
n2 FCC 69-1138, 20 FCC 2d 447.
n3 FCC 69-1137, 20 FCC 2d 287.
4. At this point, we believe
it would be useful to briefly describe the history of carrier-current
radio. A carrier-current radio system is one which is authorized to
operate as a low power radiation device pursuant to Section 15.7 of the
Commission's Rules. The station signal, a modulated RF signal, typically
is conducted along power distribution wires to buildings on a campus or other
institution; and systems using this technique are required, under Section 15.7,
to use the minimum power necessary to accomplish this purpose. n4 Carrier-current systems were originally permitted to
operate in this manner under the Commission's 1938 Low Power Rules -- the
forerunner of Part 15. While the Commission recognized that these
stations would operate in the frequency bands allocated for licensed broadcast
stations, it was of the view that carrier-current operations meeting the
specified minimal power and radiation limits were in the public interest, since
such systems were intended to function as training laboratories for students
interested in the communications arts and signal reception was generally
limited to the campus or comparable area on which the system was located.
It was felt that under these restrictions, such systems would not cause
interference to, or have any significant impact upon licensed broadcast
stations or the general public.
n4 Because of the physical laws
attendant to this technique, some radiation from the conductor is inevitable
and the signals "leaked" in this fashion allow receivers in close
proximity to the conductor to pick-up the signal without actually being
attached to the distribution system.
5. Over the years, the
Commission has several times reviewed the conditions under which
carrier-current systems operate. In 1949, the Commission issued a Notice
of Proposed Rule Making which looked toward the licensing of such systems and
permitting them to operate [*359] in accordance with the general
rules governing broadcast stations. n5
The Commission received many comments regarding the proposed rules from persons
in favor of permitting the continuance of carrier-current radio systems but who
were apprehensive about the formalities of licensing procedures.
Thereafter, in 1954, the Commission issued a Further Notice of Proposed Rule
Making, abandoning the licensing plan and proposing to allow carrier-current
systems to continue to operate under power and radiation limitations similar to
those imposed by the original Low Power Rules. n6 Carrier-current systems thus continued to operate
according to those strictures and, in 1964, the Commission terminated its proceeding
in Docket No. 9288, noting:
n5 In the Matter of Amendment of
Part 15 of the Commission's Rules Governing Restricted Radiation Devices,
Docket No. 9288, FCC 49-459, April 13, 1949, 14 F.R. 2033. In part, the
proposed 1949 rule reads as follows:
"1. Because of the social
impact of broadcasting upon the general public and the responsibilities of the
Commission in regard to the regulation of broadcasting; and
"ii. Because of the
probability of interference being caused to reception in the standard broadcast
services by the operation of devices in this band in view of the number of
broadcast receivers and transmitters now in operation:
"A. Broadcasting on these
frequencies will only be permitted in compliance with such rules and
limitations covering eligibility, licensing, technical standards and other
subject as may now be found in the Commission's Rules Governing the Standard
Broadcast Services, or as they may hereafter be amended."
n6 Further Notice of Proposed Rule
Making, Docket No. 9288, FCC 54-502, April 15, 1954, 19 F.R. 2319. The proposal
therein reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
"15.104 Carrier Current Systems Operating Above 425 kc.
* * *
"(a) The following provisions
shall be applicable after the effective date of these rules to all carrier-current
systems which operate on frequencies between 425-1605 kc for the purpose of
distributing programs to more than one broadcast receiver, provided, however,
that until June 30, 1955, existing carrier-current systems in this band shall
be required in the alternative to meet the radiation limit of 15 microvolts per
meter at a distance from any radiating source of 157,000 feet divided by the
frequency in kilocycles:
"(1) radiation shall not exceed
an intensity of 40 uv/m at distances of 100 feet or more from any radiating
source, provided, however, that such radiation shall not exceed 15 uv/m at the
border of the property exclusively under the control and for the exclusive use
of the owner and operator of the system."
The remaining, still unresolved area
in this proceeding deals with the conditions under which carrier-current
systems (including campus radio systems) should be operated. These
systems are presently regulated by the general provisions in §
15.7. The problems involved in devising new regulations for such systems
have not been resolved nor does a solution appear to be imminent.
Moreover, the data pertaining to carrier-current operations submitted in this
proceeding are now out of date.
Having accomplished the bulk of its
objective in this proceeding, and since § 15.7 appears to be reasonably
satisfactory in regulating the operation of carrier-current systems, the
Commission is of the opinion that the proceeding in this docket should be
terminated. If it should appear that further regulation of
carrier-current systems is required, the Commission will institute a new
proceeding. n7
n7 Fourth Report and Order, released
on April 17, 1964, 29 F.R. 5399.
6. Since the termination of
the above proceeding, the number and scope of carrier-current systems,
particularly on campus, has steadily increased, reflecting not only the very
substantial rise in the size of college facilities and populations, but also a
growing interest in such systems as important communications vehicles. We
have also noted the present character of these operations as depicted in a
recent survey of radio on campus conducted under the auspices of the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and the Ford Foundation. n8 Among other things, the CPB Study points out that the
average carrier-current campus system (1) has a capital investment of
$5,654; [*360] (2) is exceptionally well equipped, and has a staff
of 46 persons (virtually free of faculty supervision); and (3) is commercial
with advertising income averaging $5,344 annually. Advertising is sold by
the operator directly or through one or several national representatives for
college radio operations and other marketing enterprises.
n8 Vincent M. Badger, The College
Radio Study: Report on Student Operated Stations at Colleges and Universities
(July, 1969).
(7. Not only have the
dimensions of the individual systems continually increased but, over the past
several months, the Commission has been receiving requests from carrier-current
systems, such as those from Juniata College and the University of Cincinnati
seeking permission to expand service beyond their respective campuses. In
light of these requests for expanded service and the data set forth in the CPB
Study, we believe that additional information about overall contemporary
carrier-current system operation is necessary. Not reported on in the CPB
Study and of particular concern to the Commission are the present policies and
practices of campus carrier-current systems in such areas as the equal opportunities
requirement attendant to political programming, personal attack and fairness
doctrine, cigarette advertising, sponsorship identification and the like as
well as programming source and distribution activities of such stations.
8. Accordingly, in connection
with this inquiry, there is attached hereto a questionnaire which all
carrier-current systems operating pursuant to Section 15.7 of the Commission's
Rules and receiving this survey are instructed to complete and return to the
Commission within 30 days of receipt thereof. Since the great majority of
sizeable carrier-current operations are located on campus and since the
Commission has access to the addresses of such stations, it is to those
operations that the questionnaires are initially being sent. The questions
generally relate to technical and programming matters. Also included are
several questions relating to the commercial activities of the systems and we
wish to stress that the responses thereto will be used solely for analytical
and related purposes by the Commission -- such financial data will not be
available for public inspection under Section 0.457(d) of the Commission's
Rules. In addition, the Commission invites comments and information
relevant to this proceeding concerning both carrier-current systems and low
power communication devices from all interested persons and organizations,
including non-commercial and commercial broadcasters, advertisers and
educational institutions. Any such comments and other materials should be
filed with the Commission by June 4, 1971.
9. Additionally, this Notice
shall also constitute Notice of Proposed Rule Making looking toward the
imposition of certain broadcast programming operational requirements on those
carrier-current systems engaging in interconnection of two or more systems or
interconnection of a system with other electronic media such as broadcast
stations or CATV. The proposed programming operational requirements would
be substantially similar to those imposed on WJC n9 concomitant with its authorization to interconnect with a CATV
system. The imposed conditions require compliance with the following:
Section 73.123 of the Commission's Rules (equal opportunities for political
candidates and related requirements); Sections 315 of the communications
[*361] Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 73.123 of the Rules
(fairness, personal attacks, political editorializing); Section 317 of the
Communications Act and Section 73.119 of the Rules (sponsorship
identification); 18 U.S.C. § 1304 and Section 73.122 of the Rules
(lotteries); 18 U.S.C. § 1464 (broadcasting obscene, indecent, or profane
language); and, 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (fraud by wire and radio).
Although exact wording is not proposed at this time, we do express tentative
intent to embody the foregoing limitations on interconnected carrier-current
systems contingent, of course, on responses to this inquiry and proposed rule
making.
n9 See, Letter to Juniata College,
of October 16, 1969, 20 FCC 2d 447.
10. Authority for the inquiry
and proposed rule making instituted herein is contained in Sections 3, 4(i),
301, 303, 307 and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
11. In accordance with the
provisions of Section 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, an original and 14
copies of all comments, pleadings, briefs, and other documents shall be
furnished the Commission.
FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. APLE, Secretary.
CONCURBY:
HOUSER
CONCUR:
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER
THOMAS HOUSER IN WHICH COMMISSIONERS DEAN BURCH, CHAIRMAN; ROBERT E. LEE, AND
ROBERT WELLS JOIN
I personally hope and expect campus
carrier-current radio to grow and add diversity to our method and content of
information. I would hope college students could appreciate our awareness
of their growing importance. I am confident that my colleagues will not
undertake any regulatory action of campus radio unless clearly warranted by the
facts which are being solicited.
This matter was initiated by the
staff many months ago before this writer was on the Commission. Indeed,
the Commission as far back as 1949 began a rule making proceeding (Docket No.
9288) that contemplated licensing these stations. On termination of that
proceeding in 1964, the Commission confirmed the continued operation of
carrier-current systems as restrictive radiation devices, but also noted that
the data base was stale and stated, "... [If] it should appear that
further regulation of carrier current systems is required, the Commission will
institute a new proceeding." Thus two things are clearly apparent, viz (1)
institution of a proceeding is not necessarily a guarantee that the proposed or
any new rules or policies will be adopted; and (2) the Commission clearly
provided for a continuing review of these systems if the facts indicate such a
course. In 1969, the Commission received the first of a number of
requests to permit extension of the "service areas" of these systems
through interconnection techniques via networking or CATV. Far from
seeking to restrict or repress the development of these carrier-current
systems, the Commission unanimously voted to approve these extension requests,
just as it has approved similar subsequent requests.
The proceeding is primarily a fact
finding inquiry to gather facts to gauge the "state of the art" on
campus. The need for this inquiry appears to have arisen because of
several requests by carrier-current radio stations for expanded service areas
through connection to a CATV system, which would give a service area far beyond
the area originally contemplated by the Rules. This also gives them at
least some of the attributes of a licensed radio station that is carried on the
CATV system. Also there has been at least one request by a system to
transmit its signal via common carrier to other college campuses in a
networking type operation. Under these circumstances the Commission can
do no less than attempt to be reasonably up to date on developments in
carrier-current radio.
In an incredibly political
statement, Commissioner Johnson dissents from today's action. The
Commissioner suggests that the present inquiry "emerged somewhat
mysteriously from the bureaucracy" and that he is unable to dispel
inevitable speculation that "the real motivation [*364] behind
the Commission's sudden interest in campus radio is related to a desire to
control a medium which is run by a generation of students who have become
politically vocal..." Initially, it should be noted, that according to the
most reliable information at my disposal, the inquiry is the unanimously
recommended product of the various Commission divisions charged with the
responsibility of overseeing broadcast operations of this kind. I suggest
that it is unfortunate to characterize the genesis of this proceeding as
"mysterious", when it appears that Commissioner Johnson can offer no
factual support for such a characterization. Secondly, one wonders
whether "inevitable". Speculation as to Commission motive will
result from the Commissioner's dissent rather than from the straight forward
presentation contained in the inquiry.
Finally, and most important, the
dissenting statement is replete with words and phrases chosen to attract and
excite a selected constituency in this country. By innuendo and by the
Socratic technique of leading questions, Commissioner Johnson engages in the
precarious task of ascertaining the intent and motives of his colleagues.
The clear implication of his words is that the majority is engaging in a
politically inspired conspiracy to suppress the radio voice of college students.
Commissioner Johnson seeks not to disagree with his colleagues but to dishonor
them before his constituency. In this endeavor he has abandoned his
judicial role to become the advocate.
We as Commissioners are charged with
the overwhelming, yet challenging, task of regulating the nations wire and
radio communications. It is my view, that the keystone of our
effectiveness as a regulatory agency and the cornerstone of our
"believability" as an independent arbiter of public and private
interests, is the equality of treatment we accord to the various entities
subject to our jurisdiction. Would not a dissent from Commissioner
Johnson have been appropriate when the Commission embarked on its far more
exhaustive and financially burdensome inquiry of "conglomerate"
ownership of broadcast stations? (Docket No. 18449) Our motivation there
is precisely the same as our present concern. We seek no more than
information; without such data we cannot hope for enlightened regulation.
DISSENTBY:
JOHNSON
DISSENT:
DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER
NICHOLAS JOHNSON
In today's Notice of Inquiry and
Proposed Rule Making, the Federal Communications Commission takes the first
step towards regulating carrier current radio stations, the vast majority of
which are operated on college campuses, by students, for the college
community. These systems, which put a "radio" signal through
the electric power line, are now not regulated by the FCC because they are
(generally) extremely low power, and designed for a limited "audience"
(often no more than a single student dormitory).
A few campus carrier stations have
been so successful in their programming, however, that they are attracting
audience and advertising dollars -- and the ire of some embarrassed commercial
broadcasters with powerful transmitters. (One of the major reasons we
encouraged the unregulated operation of campus carrier stations in the
first [*365] place was their function as a training
opportunity. Apparently it's working.)
I also recognize, of course, that a
few campus stations have requested permission to go off campus via cable, have
increased power, or are interconnecting. Conditions have changed in some
isolated cases. I would have no objection to a Commission examination of
such instances -- although I think we have more important things to do.
But neither broadcaster revenue nor
a handful of cases provide any excuse whatsoever for the launching of this
general investigation of student-operated campus carrier radio systems.
So what's up? The proposal to
begin an inquiry into carrier current campus radio emerged somewhat
mysteriously from the bureaucracy. My inquiries could not uncover
precisely why, or when this project began, or who initiated it, Given the fact
that this Commission is overburdened with, and understaffed for, numerous
momentous issues literally affecting the way of life of every citizen -- cable
television, domestic satellites, AT&T's rate increase, and so forth -- the
decision to single out these insignificant student-operated stations for
thorough overall federal scrutiny would be highly questionable even as an
allocation of limited staff resources. Moreover, it will be noted that,
not-withstanding their 30 years of operation, not a single complaint is cited
by the majority, for the simple reason that virtually no complaints have ever
been filed with the FCC regarding campus carrier current radio systems.
Inevitably there will be those --
especially students -- who will wonder whether the real motivation behind the
Commission's sudden interest in campus radio is related to a desire to control
a medium which is run by a generation of students who have become politically
vocal, often in opposition to Establishment wars and other values. I
would like to be able to put such speculation to rest; unfortunately, however,
I cannot.
In our original consideration of
this issue, an article from the May 18, 1970 issue of Newsweek was brought to
the Commissioners' attention as an appendix to the staff memorandum -- along
with some other similar news stories. The article reported the activities
of campus radio stations during the nation-wide demonstrations against the
invasion of Cambodia by U.S. forces. The Newsweek article begins:
Should revolution over come to New
York University, the NYU campus probably won't look much different than it did
late last week... [The] voice of their [the students] discontent was
going out to the nation. Moratorium Radio Network (MRN) -- which
defiantly proclaimed itself "radio for college students and by college
students" -- was on the air.
Further:
"The idea just grew like the
student strikes," said Howard Doyle, 19, the news director for WNYU.
"We felt that the professional media weren't getting the facts to the
people."... WNYU served as strike headquarters...
The FCC
staff now claims that this article was brought to the Commission's attention --
not as evidence of the need for and rationale behind action -- but for the sole
purpose of illustrating the fact that the Commission could not have acted at
the time of these articles, but had to wait until later, because it might
otherwise have been charged [*366] with being ideologically
motivated. I frankly find this explanation somewhat flimsy.
Another article which the staff
brought to the Commission's attention is the "Intelligence Report"
from Parade Magazine, of May 31, 1970, which states, in part:
The "underground"
newspapers appearing on campuses and in cities throughout the nation may soon
be joined by a new and powerful medium: Carrier Current Radio [which is] moving
off the campuses and into communities, primarily minority and low-income
areas... [The] possibility of misuse for propaganda purposes will have to
be faced by the FCC. (Emphasis added.)
I find the
packaging of this information with the staff recommendation a little
unsettling, at best.
For this nation's seven million
college students, it will be difficult indeed to believe that this decision,
and the now-notorious FCC action outlawing rock music "tending to...
glorify the use of... marijuana" and other drugs, released less than three
weeks ago, are not aimed at their ideas, ideals, and life-style. n1
n1 See Licensee Responsibility to
Review Records Before Their Broadcast, Public Notice,
F.C.C. 2d , FCC 71-205 (March 5, 1971)
I am particularly disturbed by the
fact that the questionnaire being sent to campus carrier stations is not in any
way limited to interconnection, or increases in coverage, which the staff
claims is the real concern here. Thus, why should campus stations
throughout the country, which have no intention of interconnecting, have to
answer a questionnaire which asks them to indicate (1) the type of program
carried, (2) the number of hours devoted to each type of program listed, (3) a
list of a representative sample of editorial topics, * (4) the source of
program and type of program originated at other colleges, with a list of the
names of the colleges (as well as other sources of outside origination), (5)
whether they carry any political programs, and (6) how their revenues are
distributed. I see no relationship between this information and the
interconnection issue if a station does not intend to interconnect. Even
if a station did intend to interconnect, I cannot conceive of any justification
for requiring a representative list of editorial topics. Given recent
cases of overzealous federal agencies gathering in formation on civilian
activities, I am most unhappy about the breadth of this Inquiry. n2
* Since the preparation and
distribution of this opinion the General Counsel's office has informed me that
an "editorial change" has now been made in the questionnaire,
deleting (or in some other way altering) the reference to editorials on campus
carrier current stations. Needless to say, I do not find this change to
affect in any significant way the thrust of my concern.
n2 See, e.g., J. Herbers,
"Senator Ervin Thinks the Constitution Should Be Taken Like Mountain
Whiskey -- Undiluted and Untaxed," New York Times Magazine, Nov. 15, 1970,
reprinted 116 Cong. Rec. S20067, Dec. 14, 1970 (daily ed.); R. Halloran,
"Richardson Says: Data Banks Must Be Controlled," The New York Times,
March 16, 1971, reprinted 117 Cong. Rec. H1591, March 16, 1971 (daily ed.);
"No Place for the Military," (editorial) Kansas City Star, March 5,
1971, reprinted 117 Cong. Rec. H1674, March 17, 1971 (daily ed.).
The article on Senator Ervin
reports: "At present he is attacking, through the Constitutional Richts subcommittee
he leads, a massive surveillance system being put together by the Government,
including computerized files on citizens who have engaged in 'political
dissent' or 'civil disorders.'" Herbers, loc. cit. supra.
Recently some of my colleagues have
bemoaned what they view as "regulatory overkill" in actions by this
Commission. See Chairman Burch's statement in the Final Decision in the
Computer Inquiry, F.C.C. 2d , FCC
71-255 (1971). It is mystifying that my colleagues [*367]
always seem to find "regulatory overkill" when the Commission is
dealing with large regulated utilities or inquiring into conglomerate ownership
patterns -- taking actions that have been recommended both by its staff and the
Department of Justice -- while finding it perfectly appropriate in the
Commission's order of priorities to regulate rock music and student-operated
college carrier current radio stations.
I dissent.
APPENDIX:
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554
To:
Carrier-Current System
The Commission has adopted a Notice
of Inquiry and Proposed Rule Making in an effort to ascertain current
information with respect to low power radiation devices and carrier-current
systems which operate pursuant to Part 15 of the Commission's Rules.
In this connection there is herewith
attached a questionnaire relating to carrier-current system operation and it is
requested that the operator of your system answer the question set forth to the
fullest extent possible and return the questionnaire, by May 4, 1971, to the
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. If additional
space is required for the answer to any question, the information should be
included on a separate sheet of paper.
Thank you for your cooperation.
FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. WAPLE, Secretary.
CARRIER-CURRENT RADIO SURVEY
A. General Information
1.
"Call letters" system presently employs
2.
Name of institution (e.g., university, college, etc.)
3.
Address of institution
4.
Address of system if different than above
5.
Name of system manager, faculty advisor or other person responsible for
supervision
6.
Number of students on campus
7.
Number of buildings on campus on which signal is received
8.
Areas other than immediate campus served by carrier current lines
(a) Number and location of auxiliary
transmitters on and off campus
(b) Estimated number of persons
receivings signal off-campus
9.
Number of students on staff
B. Technical Information
1.
How is signal distributed
2. Mean
operating power output of each transmitter in system
3.
Radiated field strength in uV/m at feet (specify location at which
measurement was made)
4.
How were above measurement made
5.
Frequency
6. Is
your signal carried by other media such as other carrier-current system, CATV
system, etc. If so, identify (stations) and (systems) and number of subscribers
if carried by CATV
7.
How many other radio station signals (AM or FM) can be routinely received on
campus
C. Programming
(The answers to the following
questions should reflect the programming practices of the past year except
where otherwise indicated. Where precise answers are unknown, approximate
figures should be given).
1.
Daily hours of operation am. pm. to am. pm.
2.
Summertime operation if different than above. am. pm.
to am. pm.
3.
Check the program types carried by your system during a typical week and list
aggregate weekly time (in hours) devoted to each.
Music
News (exclusive of campus
events)
Campus Affairs
Editorial
Panel Discussion
Sports
Instructional
Public Affairs
Commercial
Other
4. Do
any of your programs originate at sources other than your
studios. Yes No
If so, indicate source and type of
program.
Source of program Type of program
a. Commercial Radio Stations
(list call letters).
b. Network (list network).
c. Transcribed Programs (list
sources).
d. Other college radio
operations.
5.
Does your system carry any political programs or devote time to political
candidates for public office. (Does not include campus
elections) Yes No
6. If
answer to question 5 is Yes, is equal opportunity afforded to opposing
candidates. Yes No
7.
Does your system carry editorials or programs relating to controversial issues
of public importance (as contemplated by Section 73.123 of the Commission's
Rules). Yes No
8. If
answer to question 7 is Yes, is opportunity afforded to persons having opposing
views. Yes No
9.
Does your system maintain program logs or other record of programs
carried. Yes No
10.
Does your system sell commercial time. Yes No **
** Responses relating to financial
matters will be used solely for analytical and related purposes and will not be
available for public inspection. (See Paragraph 8 of Notice of Inquiry).
11.
Is time sold by: 1. Your staff ; Sales Representatives ;
Others .
12.
What percent of advertising revenues are derived from local ; regional
; and national sources.
13.
Total revenues from sale of commercial time ; total revenues from other
sources (list) .
14.
Does your system require that commercial messages contain sponsorship
identification. Yes No
15.
Net income after operating expenses .
16.
How are revenues distributed .
17.
If your system has a schedule of commercial rates, attach to back of this
page.
Name of person completing form
Address
Title (if any)