1107MV

Print Request:   LEXSEE

Time of Request: November 08, 2007  02:50 PM EST

Number of Lines: 353

Job Number:      1822:58557037

Client ID/Project Name:

 

Research Information:

Lexsee

 

Note:

 

 

                               LEXSEE 58 FR 37840

 

                                FEDERAL REGISTER

 

                                 VOL. 58, No. 132

 

                                    Notices

 

                        DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)

 

                                    Forest Service

 

                      Fee Schedule for Communications Uses

 

                                    Part VII

 

                                  58 FR 37840

 

DATE: Tuesday, July 13, 1993

 

 

   ACTION: Notice of proposed policy; request for public comment.

 

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

To view the next page, type .np* TRANSMIT.

To view a specific page, transmit p* and the page number, e.g. p*1

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

 

[*37840]

 

   SUMMARY: The Forest Service proposes to adopt a revised fee schedule for

annual rental charges for certain communications uses authorized on National

Forest System lands. This proposed schedule would supplement fee schedules for

communications uses adopted by Forest Service Regions in 1989 and modified in

1992. The proposed schedule would complete the agency's efforts to establish

annual rental fees for all communications uses in Forest Service Regions 1-6 and

to establish fees that reflect fair market value, as required by Title V of the

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. Public comment is invited.

 

 

   DATES: Comments must be received in writing by October 12, 1993.

 

 

   ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the Director, Lands Staff (2720), Forest

Service, USDA, P.O. Box 96090, Washington, DC 20090-6090.

 

   The public may inspect comments received on this proposed policy in the

Office of the Director, Lands Staff, room 4, South, Auditor's Building, 205 14th

Street SW., Washington, DC. Those wishing to inspect comments are encouraged to

call ahead (202 205-1367) to facilitate entry into the building.

 

 

   FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Anderson, Lands Staff, Room 4, South,

(202) 205-1256.

 

 

   SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 

Background on Communications Site Fees

 

   Pursuant to statutory and regulatory authority, the Forest Service authorizes

use of National Forest System lands for a variety of public, commercial, and

private activities. There are over 72,000 authorizations in effect on these

Federal lands. Included in this total are about 6,000 authorizations for

communications uses, generally found at high elevation locations and involving

the construction of a building and tower with antennae or the placement of one

or more antennae placed atop a building owned by another permittee. The agency

recognizes 13 types of communications uses; these generally correspond to types

of communications licenses issued by the Federal Communications Commission, and

are grouped into 3 categories, as follows:

 

 

Category of     Type of use

use

 

A. Commercial:

                1. Radio broadcast.

                2. Television broadcast.

                3. Broadcast translator.

                4. Cable and subscription television.

                5. Mobile radio: commercial communications.

                6. Cellular telephone.

 

B. Industrial:

                1. Common carrier microwave relay.

                2. Industrial microwave relay.

                3. Mobile radio: internal communications.

                4. Natural resource/environmental monitoring.

                5. Passive reflector.

 

C. Personal:

                1. Amateur radio.

                2. Personal/private "receive only."

 

   Since 1983, the Forest Service has sought to bring annual rental fees for

communications uses authorized to use National Forest System lands to fair

market value. Section 504(g) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of

1976 states "The holder of a right-of-way shall pay annually in advance the fair

market value thereof as determined by the Secretary granting, issuing, or

renewing such right-of-way * * *"

 

   Further, the Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 requires the

Federal Government to receive fees for the use of Federal lands and authorizes

heads of agencies to charge fees for services or benefits provided by the agency

that are fair and based on fair market value and cost to the Government. Office

of Management and Budget Circular A-25 implements and further defines the 1952

Act and directs agencies to establish user fees based on sound business

management practices.

 

   Until 1983, Forest Service fees for communications uses were 0.2 percent of

the permittee's investment plus 5 percent of the rental fees received by a

permittee from sub-tenants of the same facility. An administrative appeal

decision in 1983 concluded that this fee formula did not yield fair market

value. Consequently, in 1985, the Forest Service, by notice in the Federal

Register (50 FR 40574), adopted national policy on administration of

communications sites, including direction to its field officers to use current

market data to determine rental fees. These fees were to be determined on a

regional basis by one of three methods: Fee schedules, individual site

appraisals, or competitive bids. The Regional Foresters chose to use fee

schedules. Surveys of lease transactions in the private market were completed in

1986. Those surveys provided the necessary information on fair market value and

were the basis for development and promulgation of proposed regional fee

schedules. Final schedules were adopted by the Regional Foresters through

publication in the Federal Register from 1987-1989. These schedules applied to

communications sites serving mostly rural areas. The notices explained that fees

for sites serving urban areas-Los Angeles, for example-would be determined by

on-site appraisals, because the higher values attached to these sites were not

typical of the transactions forming the basis of the fee schedules. (See 54 FR

35031, August 23, 1989, for an example of these regional fee schedules.)

 

   Because the agency's pre-1985 fee policy for communications sites had no

provision for updating fees, most permittees' fees had remained unchanged for as

long as 20 years. Consequently, when the new fees were placed in effect, these

permittees faced significant fee increases. This led to widespread permittee

complaint to the agency and Congress. In response, in the fiscal year 1990

appropriations act for the agency, Congress adopted an administrative provision

preventing the agency from raising fees for existing communications uses over

the amount in effect on January 1, 1989. Congress also directed the agency to

review the regional fee schedules, giving particular emphasis on how the

schedules affected rural communities in the western U.S., and report its

findings to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

 

   The congressional action did not prohibit the agency from establishing fees

at fair market value for communications uses occupying new facilities after

January 1, 1989. Under existing statutory and regulatory authority, the agency

has proceeded to require those obtaining permits after January 1, 1989, and

occupying new facilities to pay annual rental fees based on fair market value.

 

   To provide the factual basis for the congressionally mandated report,

appraisers of the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management conducted

intensive appraisals of 12 individual communications uses located throughout the

western U.S. Over 100 owners or lessees of private communications sites were

contacted to gain information on lease fees and terms. The report submitted to

the Appropriations Committees in April  [*37841]  1991 recommended several

changes to the previously adopted regional schedules. These recommendations were

incorporated as modifications to the 1989 fee schedules through regional notices

sent to communications site permittees in 1992.

 

   Congress, however, felt that the agency's fee determination process was

flawed and that its permittees had not had a sufficient opportunity to

participate in the analysis and report. Consequently, the prohibition on fee

increases for uses authorized prior to 1989 was continued and was extended to

include communications sites on lands administered by the Bureau of Land

Management. The fiscal year 1991 appropriations act provision did allow both

agencies to increase their fees for existing uses up to 15 percent over those

fees in effect on January 1, 1989.

 

   In September 1991, the Forest Service contracted with a private, independent

appraiser to appraise all communications uses at 12 National Forest mountain top

sites throughout the western U.S. that served urban areas. This appraiser,

following uniform appraisal practices, examined private leases on lands similar

to those administered by the agency and serving urban populations in

Albuquerque, Tucson, Flagstaff, Boise, Missoula, San Diego, and the Los Angeles

Basin. The appraisals were completed and accepted by the agency in March 1993.

 

   The appraised values for these sites confirmed the influence of population on

communications site rental value. For example, the appraiser concluded that the

annual value for television broadcast transmitters in the Los Angeles area was $

75,000, while comparable leases on sites serving low population areas in the

Interior West were in the $ 5,000 range. Rental fees for commercial mobile radio

ranged from a high of $ 60,000 in the Los Angeles Basin to a low of $ 2,500 in

some areas of the Interior West.

 

   The agency notified each permittee occupying one of the 12 sites by

registered letter of the appraisal and invited the permittees to provide any

communications site lease information and any concerns about the agency's fees

determninations practices. Over 2,000 letters were sent; 106 responses were

received. Following completion of the appraisal, the agency scheduled public

meetings at the 12 locations to allow permittees and others to review the

results with the appraiser. Permittees raised concern over the values resulting

from these appraisals, many of whom assumed that the values translated directly

to rental fees. In fact, the appraised values constitute advice to Forest

Service officials charged with the responsibility of establishing fees. These

officials consider a wide range of factors affecting fair market value and do

not limit a fee decision to only appraisal results.

 

   While the on-site appraisals were underway, Congress, through the fiscal year

1992 appropriations act, continued the limitation on fee increases for uses

authorized prior to 1989. In this legislation, Congress also directed the

Secretaries of Agriculture and of the Interior to establish an advisory

committee comprised of representatives of the broadcast industry (radio and

television) to advise the Secretaries of Agriculture and of the Interior on

appropriate methods of determining fees for radio and television broadcast uses

on National Forest System and public lands.

 

   The Radio and Television Broadcast Use Fee Advisory Committee was established

on June 18, 1992. It submitted its report to the Secretaries on December 11,

1992. The 11-member committees recommended the use of fee schedules over

individual site appraisals based on cost efficiency and ease of administration.

It also developed and proposed actual fee schedules for radio and television

broadcast uses. The committee considered fee schedules prepared by the agencies

and developed from comparable private lease transactions, including appraisal

information from the 12 communications sites described above. However, the

committee was concerned that these fee schedules would impose fees on

broadcasters that were too substantial. It elected instead to adopt fee

schedules developed from information obtained from several sources, including

informal surveys by its members. The committee first developed estimated rental

fees for television broadcast uses, stratified into population categories using

the broadcast industry's "Area of Dominant Influence" (ADI) market rankings.

Estimated fees for radio broadcast uses were then set at 70 percent of the

television use fee and stratified by population using the "Metro Survey Area"

(MSA) population market rankings for radio. The estimated rental fees for both

television and radio use were then reduced by 30 percent, an amount identified

by the committee as a composite adjustment to account for such factors as public

service by the permittee, differences in rights granted by private and public

leases, and additional costs and administrative burdens imposed by the

requirements of the agencies. In recommending this schedule, the committee

acknowledged that its recommended television and radio fee schedules did not

represent fair market value.

 

   The Advisory Committee made additional recommendations on implementation of

the fee schedules and administration of authorizations. It suggested that

permittees who sublease space to other communications facilities should pay 25

percent of their gross rental income to the Government in addition to the annual

fee. A companion recommendation would require the agencies to adopt a

"footprint" lease in which only the owners of the building would have an

authorization and the tenants would not be issued authorizations by the agencies

as is the current practice. It recommended that the base rental fee be indexed

to the Consumer Price Index-Urban (CPI-U) with annual indexed fee increases of

at least 3 percent but no more than 5 percent. Finally, it recommended that fee

increases of more than $ 1,000 to individual permittees be phased-in over a 2

year period and the entire fee schedule be re-evaluated after a period of no

more than 10 years.

 

   The Acting Secretary of Agriculture, in transmitting the Advisory Committee

report to Congress, endorsed the committee's recommendations on fee

implementation and administration, but rejected the proposed fee schedule on the

basis that it did not represent fair market value, as required by law. The

Acting Secretary praised the work of the committee in providing insights into

the characteristics of the radio and television broadcasting industry but stated

that the committee-recommended fees would deprive the Government and taxpayers

of legitimate revenues totalling millions of dollars each year.

 

Proposed Fee Schedule

 

   In response to the Secretary's concern, as well as to address the need to

develop fee schedules for all categories of communications uses, the Forest

Service and the Bureau of Land Management continued their efforts to develop

market-based fee schedules. The agencies continued to assemble data from many

segments of the communications industry, resulting in a data base incorporating

over 1,500 private lease transactions. The cellular telephone industry, which

had not been included in earlier fee schedules, provided current lease

information that enabled the agencies to develop schedules for this type of use.

The commercial mobile radio segment of the communications industry also

volunteered substantial private lease information from certain markets.

[*37842]

 

   Based on the quantity and quality of its private lease information, and

cognizant of the cost efficiencies and reduced impacts on agency staff obtained

by using fee schedules over on-site appraisals, the Forest Service has decided

to use fee schedules for most communications uses. Thus, it proposes to abandon

its earlier policy of using fee schedules only for sites serving rural areas and

using on-site appraisals for sites serving urban areas.

 

   The agency believes that the statutory requirement for fair market value for

use of communications sites on Federal lands can be obtained from an analysis of

the actions of private property owners that are operating in the competitive

marketplace. The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, using

information gained from the Advisory Committee, hundreds of discussions with

industry representatives and private lessors, commercial communications site

managers, State and local government representatives, appraisers and over 1,500

confirmed private lease transactions, have developed fee schedules for the 4

categories of communications use not previously included in Forest Service fee

schedules. These categories are: (1) FM radio broadcast, (2) television

broadcast, (3) mobile radio commercial, and (4) cellular telephone. In every

case, the fees indicated in the schedule are within the range indicated by the

private lease transactions. The fee schedule is shown in Table I which is set

out at the end of this notice.

 

Explanation of Table 1

 

   The proposed fee schedule in Table 1 reflects information provided by the

Advisory Committee, industry representatives, lessees and lessors, appraisers,

State and local agencies, commercial site managers, and over 1,500 private

communication site transactions. The market data was separated according to the

category of communications use. Within each category, the individual transaction

was reviewed to identify the ground rent portion of the fees (that is, the

amount of the fee directly attributable to use of the land, excluding amounts

for utilities, roads or other benefits provided by the lessor).

 

   Industry representatives helped define the parameters for the groupings

within each schedule. In the case of television broadcast, the Advisory

Committee recommended the strata be based on the Area of Dominant Influence

(ADI), a market ranking system developed by the Arbitron Company that ranks 210

television markets in the U.S. according to the number of television households

they contain. For radio broadcast, the Advisory Committee suggested the use of

Arbitron Company's Metro Survey Area ranking of 261 U.S. radio markets. Areas

not included in the television and radio market survey listings were included in

the lowest fee strata. The agencies found that about 50 percent of the U.S.

radio markets are not included in the Metro Survey Area rankings. For commercial

mobile radio use, population (based on U.S. Census reports) was used to define

the size of area served by the facility. Cellular telephone use was based on

whether the facility was located within or outside a Standard Metropolitan

Statistical Area, as defined by the U.S. Department of Commerce. The suggested

parameters for each of the 4 uses were validated with the market data in the

agency's market analysis to ensure there was an appropriate correlation.

 

   In establishing fees for each strata, the agencies stayed within the range of

private lease information. Since each strata represented a substantial market

share, fees were established based on the lower range of information found in

each strata.

 

   Table 1 also addresses the issue of subtenants in lessees communications

facilities. Again, the agencies looked to the market for guidance. In the case

of radio and television broadcast facilities, a range of percentages were found,

averaging about 25 percent. That number was consistent with the Advisory

Committee's recommendation that the Government collect 25 percent of tenant

revenues. This is believed consistent with the practice in the private market

and is proposed to be adopted by the agencies.

 

   In the other categories of use, the agencies were also guided by private

market practice. For example, in most markets, the rentals for commercial mobile

radio facilities are a flat fee. However, newer private leases in the largest

markets indicate an increasing number of transactions where the lessor shares in

the revenues in lieu of a flat fee. The proposed commercial mobile radio fee

schedule reflects this information.

 

Additional Fee Schedule Considerations

 

   The Forest Service considered several other factors associated with the

adoption of a fee schedule which would be incorporated into the authorization of

a communications site. Such factors include those revealed in the market

analysis and those recommended by the Advisory Committee. Thus, upon adoption of

the fee schedule the agency also proposes to adopt the following terms and

conditions as part of the permit for communications site uses:

 

1. Annual Indexing

 

   The rental fees shown in Table 1 would be subject to an annual index to

ensure the fee is kept current with fair market value. The agency has found that

use of an index is common practice in the private lease market. Accordingly, it

proposes to use the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics'

Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) as an annual index for

communications site fees. To yield a CPI-U multiplier that would be used to

annually update the communications site fee schedule, the CPI-U for July of the

current year would be divided by the CPI-U for July of the previous year.

 

2. Footprint Lease

 

   The fee schedule indicates that a permittee owning a communications facility

whose authorizations allows the leasing of space in that facility to other

communications facilities would be required to pay 25 percent of the gross

rental receipts to the Government in addition to the annual rental fee. If

implemented, the agency would no longer require separate authorizations for

tenants in a permittee-owned building. Instead, the agency would issue a

"footprint lease" to the building owner who would be designated as a "facility

manager." Use of the footprint lease would improve the efficiency of the

agency's administration of these multi-user facilities and result in

considerable cost-savings. Further, this practice is commonly found in leases on

private communications sites.

 

   Holders of these leases would be required to submit a certified list to the

agency identifying tenants, fees received, and gross revenue. The lease would

contain a "best efforts" clause assuring that rents are market-based and

correctly reported to the agency. This would be necessary to ensure that there

is no attempt at avoiding the proper fair market value fee.

 

3. Fee Schedule Phase-In

 

   The agency recognizes that implementation of the proposed fee schedule could

significantly raise fees for some permittees. Thus, it proposes to phase-in the

fee schedule as follows: If the fee increase is $ 1,000 or more, the fee would

be phased-in over a 5 year period at $ 1,000 per year or 20 percent of the total

increase per year, whichever is greater. The full fee, as indicated in the fee

schedule, plus additional annual amounts through indexing, would be reached in

the fifth year. For example,  [*37843]  for a current fee of $ 1,000 that

increases to a new fee of $ 5,000, the first year fee would be $ 2,000, the

second year would be $ 3,000, continuing until the new fee plus annual indexing

is in place. For a current fee of $ 1,000 that increases to $ 11,000, the first

year fee would be $ 3,000 ($ 1,000 plus 20 percent of $ 10,000), the second year

fee would be $ 5,000, the third year fee $ 7,000, the fourth year fee $ 9,000,

and the fifth year fee $ 11,000, plus annual indexing.

 

   The phase-in of the fee schedule is being proposed as a sound business

management practice. The agency recognizes that the phase-in will result in

reduced receipts to the Treasury in the initial years of the revised fee

schedule implementation. However, the agency believes that the magnitude of some

fee increases under the proposed fee schedule, due in part to the length of time

the fee schedule has been under development and debate, and to its decision to

change the method of determining fair market value to obtain more accurate fees,

could impose an economic burden on some permittees with an associated risk of

adverse impact on their business. The phase-in is proposed to minimize that

risk.

 

4. Reevaluation of the Fee Schedule

 

   The agency proposes to reevaluate the fee schedule in ten years or less to

ensure communications site fees remain at fair market value. Thus, each

permittee's annual rental fee established as a result of this schedule would be

reviewed.

 

Fee Schedule Implementation

 

   Adoption of this fee schedule and associated policies will require Forest

Service Region's 1 through 6, generally encompassing National Forest System land

west of the one-hundredth meridian, to modify their existing fee schedules to

incorporate Table 1. Upon adoption of a final fee schedule, the agency will

direct the Regional Foresters to make appropriate revisions to those schedules

and to give notice of those changes in the Federal Register. The agency

anticipates adoption and implementation of a final fee schedule for the 4

communications uses described in this notice by January 1, 1994.

 

   Since the private market analysis completed by the Forest Service and the

Bureau of Land Management focused primarily on communications uses in the

western States, this proposed fee schedule is not intended to guide fees in

Regions 8 and 9, encompassing the 33 eastern States. Instead, the Forest Service

will validate the fee schedule's applicability to communications sites in those

States, collect additional market data as necessary, and make any necessary

supplements to the Table 1 fee schedule to incorporate communications sites in

the eastern U.S. The agency expects to implement the fee schedule in the eastern

States by January 1, 1995.

 

Summary

 

   The Forest Service is proposing the fee schedule in Table 1 as a supplement

to the existing 6 western regional fee schedules adopted in 1989 and modified in

1992. The agency believes that the proposed fee schedule meets the statutory and

regulatory requirements to obtain fair market value fees from authorized

commercial and private communications uses on National Forest System lands and

that its adoption would be in the public interest.

 

   The agency's regional offices would make appropriate modifications to

existing fee schedules adopted in 1989, which are incorporated as regional

supplements to title 2700, Special Uses Management of the Forest Service Manual.

If this fee schedule is adopted, it would place most communications uses on

National Forest System lands in Regions 1 through 6 under a fee schedule. The

fee schedule would be validated for use in Regions 8 and 9 in the coming year

and necessary modifications to accommodate communications sites in the eastern

U.S. would be made. Exceptions to use of the fee schedule would be allowed in

certain situations. For example, a bid procedure may be used where a

communications site is the focus of competition between like facilities. Sites

with truly unique characteristics, such as the Aspen-Vail area of Colorado, also

may require use of on-site appraisals.

 

   It is the agency's intention that its fee schedule be fully consistent with

that of the Bureau of Land Management. The Forest Service understands that the

Bureau plans to adopt fee schedules for all communications uses applicable to

lands under its jurisdiction and will incorporate the fee schedules into its

overall communications site fee policy in a separate Federal Register notice.

 

   Comments received on this proposed policy will be considered in the adoption

of the final policy, notice of which will be published in the Federal Register.

 

Environmental Impact

 

   This proposed policy would establish a fee schedule to guide the

administrative process of calculating annual fees to be charged holders of

authorizations for communications uses on National Forest System lands. The

schedule would apply to Forest Service Regions 1 through 6 and would be

incorporated into existing regional fee schedules for communications uses. Upon

adoption of a final fee schedule, individual authorization holders would be

notified of the changes in their annual fees.

 

   Section 31.1b of Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180); September 18,

1992) excludes from documentation in an environmental assessment or impact

statement "rules, regulations, or policies to establish Service-wide

administrative procedures, program processes or instructions." The agency's

preliminary assessment is that this policy falls within this category of actions

and that no extraordinary circumstances exist which would require preparation of

an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. A final

determination will be made upon adoption of the final policy.

 

Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public

 

   This policy will not result in additional paperwork not already required by

law or not already approved for use. Therefore, the review provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507) and implementing regulations at

5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.

 

Regulatory Impact

 

   This proposed policy has been reviewed under USDA procedures and Executive

Order 12291 on Federal Regulations. It has been determined that this is not a

major rule. The rule will not have an effect of $ 100 million or more on the

economy, substantially increase prices or costs for consumers, industry, or

State or local governments, nor adversely affect competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based

enterprises to compete in foreign markets. In short, little or no effect on the

National economy will result from this rule.

 

   This action will bring annual rental fees charged holders of authorizations

for communications sites on National Forest System lands, which have been held

to an artificially low amount for many years, to fair market value as required

by statute and administrative direction.

 

   The fees which would be placed in effect by this proposed policy would remove

the special benefit of low rental charges enjoyed by communications site

authorization holders on the Federal land over those who lease land from private

landowners. The increased  [*37844]  revenues resulting from this fee schedule

will result in increased payments to States and counties in which the National

Forest System lands containing the authorized facilities are located under

current statutory authorities (16 U.S.C. 500).

 

   Moreover, this policy has been considered in light of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), and it has been determined that this

action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of

small entities. The proposed policy and fee schedule is limited to that segment

of the communications industry operating on National Forest System lands. There

are approximately 6,000 communications site permits in effect on these Federal

lands. Available records do not indicate the number of such permits held by

small entities. Further, the statutory and administrative requirements to obtain

fair market value for authorized uses of National Forest System lands do not

provide a basis for charging lower fees to small entities. The phase-in of

annual fees proposed in this notice will allow small entities to adjust the new

fees over a period of time and thus minimize the risk of adverse impact on some

businesses because of the magnitude of the increase in some fees.

 

   In order to provide adequate time for public review and comment and

consideration of those comments in the adoption of a final fee policy and

schedule prior to the next annual fee filing, there was not sufficient time to

permit review and clearance under E.O. 12291 and Federal regulations. The final

policy will be submitted for review under E.O. 12291.

 

   Dated: July 1, 1993.

 

George M. Leonard,

 

Associate Chief.

 

 [*37845]

 

                          TABLE 1.

           PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE FOR SELECTED COMMUNICATIONS

                         SITE USES

                 NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS

 

  Type of       Basis of Rental Fee and  Proposed

Communications  Rental Fee Strata        Annual Fee

    Use

 

Television      Televison Households

Broadcast       Served in Television

                Markets Ranked by Area

                Dominant Influence fn 1

                -750,000 households and  $ 45,000 (Plus

                more                              25

                -200,000-749,999         $ 19,000 Percent

                -120,000-199,999         $ 6,000  From

                 -50,000-119,999         $ 4,500  Space

                 -49,999 and less        $ 3,000  Rental

                   and non-ADI areas              Income)

 

FM Radio        Number of Persons Aged

Broadcast       12 or older In Radio

                Markets Ranked by metro

                Survey Area fn 2

                -1,000,000 persons and   $ 34,000 (Plus

                more                              25

                 -400,000-999,999        $ 14,000 Percent

                 -200,000-399,999        $ 5,500  From

                  -75,000-199,999        $ 4,000  Space

                  -74,999 and less       $ 2,100  Rental

                   and non-MSA areas              Income)

 

Commercial      Number of Persons Within

Mobile Radio    Areas Served fn 3

                 500,000 persons and

                 more                    ($ 12,000) fn 4

 

                 250,000-499,999         $ 7,500

                 150,000-249,999         $ 5,000

                  60,000-149,999         $ 2,500

                  59,999 and less        $ 1,200

 

Cellilar         Within an SMSA. fn 5    $ 7,500

Telephone        Outside an SMSA:

                  -Urban or developed    $ 5,000

                  area

                  -Rural or undeveloped  $ 2,500

                  area

 

  Typer of      Examples of Urban Areas Served --

Communications  Communications Sites on NFS Lands

    Use

 

Television

Broadcast

                Los  Angeles, San Diego

                Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Fresno, Tucson

                Reno, Eugene, Boise, Bakerssfield

                Idaho Falls-Pocatello, Missoula

                Twin Falls, Flagstaff

 

FM Radio

Broadcast

                Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside-San Bernardin

                Las Vegas, Tucson, Albuquerque,

                Reno, Boise, Bakerssfield

                Santa Fe, Medford-Ashland

                Montrose, Craig-Forsyth, Dillon

 

Commercial

Mobile Radio

                Los Angeles, Oxnafd-Ventura, San Diego

                 Phoenix, Las Vegas, Bakersfield

                Albuquerque, Salem, Reno,

                Boise

                Medford, Santa Fe

                Pocatello, Idaho Falls

 

Cellilar        Los Angeles

Telephone

                Kalispell, MT, Glenwood Springs, CO

 

                Transportation corridors

 

fn 1 Area of Dominant Influence (ADI) market rankings from

     Arbitron Company Data for 1991-1992 reported in

     Broadcasting & Cable Market Place, 1992, compiled by R.R.

     Bowker, A Reed Reference Publishing Company, New

     Providence, NJ

 

fn 2 Metro Survey area radio market rankings from Arbitron

     Company  Fall 1991 market definitions reported in

     Broadcasting & Cable Market Place, 1992, compiled by R.R.

     Bowker, A Reed Reference Publishing Company, New

     Providence, NJ

 

fn 3 Based on U.S. Census Bureau estimates of population for the

     areas served by the facility.

 

fn 4 $ 12,000 or 25% of space rental, whichever is greater

 

fn 5 SMSA: Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area

 

[FR Doc. 93-16694 Filed 7-12-93; 8:45 am]

 

   BILLING CODE 3410-11-C