10. In adopting Section 73.3556 in 1992, the Commission found some advantages that allow for some planning of mouth-watering work. In particular, the Commission found that some duplication would save resources for local broadcasters invested in the production of expensive programmes. By limiting duplication programming to 25% of a station`s total average weekly programming hours, the Commission sought to strike the right balance between the possibility of transforming expensive programmes and the continued promotion of competition and diversity of programming in the local market. Are there still the advantages of dual programming identified by the Commission in the current market? Is the 25% overlap in the total number of hours of average weekly programming on a channel remaining in balance, given the changes that have occurred over the past 27 years? If we maintain and change the rule, the level of programming that can be duplicated in current stations should be increased or reduced, and if so, what would be that reasonable percentage? Commentators should justify any proposed changes to authorized programming and explain the benefits they believe will be to radio stations and their listeners. And if the Commission were to change and maintain the spark overlap rule, would the limitation of broadcasters` choice of programs be in mind? 28. Take steps to minimize the significant economic impact on small businesses and consider meaningful alternatives. The FRG requires an agency to describe all the key alternatives it has considered in implementing its proposed approach, which may include, among other options: 1) establishing different compliance obligations, reports or schedules that take into account the resources available to small businesses; (2) clarifying, consolidating or simplifying compliance or reporting obligations under the small business rule; (3) the use of performance standards instead of design; and (4) a derogation from coverage of the rule or part of it for small businesses. The NPRM is seeking an opinion on the removal of the broadcaster duplication rule, which would relieve broadcasters, including small businesses, of the costs of complying with the rule. The NPRM also asks for comments on changing the rule rather than repealing it, alternatives that minimize any burden on small businesses, and maintaining the existing rule.
21. Necessity and objective of the proposed regulation. This NPRM wishes to give an opinion on whether the Commission should remove or amend the radio overlap rule, which limits duplication of the same service programming to 25% of the total number of hours over an average week of broadcast for commercial AM and FM radio stations with 50% or more overlapping contours that are generally in possession or as part of a time intermediation agreement. Since the Adoption of the rule by the Commission in 1992, the broadcasting industry has undergone significant changes, including a significant increase in the number of licensed radio stations, the introduction of AM programming into the FM band through FM translators, the improvement of digital broadcasting technology, and new digital methods of distributing multi-device audio content. On the basis of these amendments, the NPRM intends to provide an opinion on whether the radio-wide rule has survived or whether there is still a need to promote the public policy objectives of competition, program diversity and radio spectrum effectiveness. 26. To determine whether a group of companies is classified as small under the above definition, it is necessary to include (control) commercial affiliations. Our estimate is therefore probably higher than the number of small businesses that could be affected by our action, because the revenue on which it is based does not include or aggregate the revenues of related companies.