of local, public service programs. CATV systems, on the other hand, lo not need advertising dollars to support their operations and can be he voice of local expression so long sought after.

Origination of local sporting events, city council meetings, public notices, educational programs, and other matters of that nature could be carried on CATV systems and done so during prime time. I read with interest in the March 14, 1966, issue of Broadcasting magazine, on page 83, that the CATV system in Winchester, Va., must produce 30 hours a month local public service programing as a requirement of ts franchise.

I believe that our success in San Diego has been and will continue to e in direct proportion to our service to the public. This service inludes not only bringing more and better service from television stations but, when the opportunity arises, of meeting the needs of the community by the origination of programs which will give the public a greater means for local expression.

We are willing to give local TV stations simultaneous duplication protection and, in fact, offered simultaneous duplication protection long before the Commission adopted any order. We do, however, believe we are entitled to the opportunity to have our place in the open market and provide our service to people who obviously desire it. We support Congressman Rogers' bill, H.R. 12914, or any other legislation which would preserve our privileges of bringing unlimited television pictures to our subscribers.

If I may, Mr Chairman, I would like to distribute these pictures now and make them part of the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rogers.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Thank you. I belive I have no questions. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Van Deerlin.

Mr. VAN DEERLIN. No, think you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mackay.

Mr. MACKAY. What is the usual charge arrangement on your system?

Mr. DRUCKMAN. Our system, Congressman Mackay, carries 12 channels. I know that that is far greater than the number of channels carried by most systems. Our charge is $5.50 per month for our service.

Mr. MACKAY. Thank you. I have no further questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Adams.

Mr. ADAMS. I have no questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very kindly for coming before us. I am sorry if we appear to be in a hurry tonight, but I will say to the rest of those who are here to testify that we are bound to close these hearings now. I am sorry for those of you who have come some distance. You have the privilege of coming back. I will say, too, that you have the privilege of coming now and presenting anything for the record, which will be considered by the committee as if it were given by you personally.

Are there any on this list who would like to come forward and present their statements for the record?

Mr. EVANSON. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. I might say this: We are not trying to shut off anybody because you will have an opportunity later to come back to these

hearings and present your statement. I am only doing this for the convenience of those who have traveled great distance.

Mr. EVANSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce this in the record. I don't care to read it at this time, or take up any of the committee's time. If I could just have this statement put in the record. My name is Richard Evanson from Seattle, with Total Telecable. I would appreciate it very much.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be inserted in the record. (Mr. Evanson's prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF RICHARD EVANSON, PRESIDENT, TOTAL TELECABLE, INC.

My name is Richard Evanson. I am president of Total Telecable, Inc., located at 1616 Norton Building. Seattle, Wash. Total Telecable and its wholly owned subsidiaries have over 10 years of CATV experience. We provide CATV service to 9 Washington cities representing over 100,000 people.

I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your committee and to express my company's feelings with regard to one aspect of the proposed CATV legisiation now before you. I will limit my comments only to the question of program origination.

I will further limit my comments by excluding any analysis of the merits or demerits of pay TV. As you probably know, program origination takes two forms. A pay TV operation where the customer pays for his television on a per program basis is one form. A second form involves locally originated programs for which no extra payment is made by the subscriber. It is on the second form of program origination that I would like to comment.

Over a year ago, our company came to the conclusion that there were a great many local events in the communities which we served that were not covered by normal television broadcast facilities. The reason for this lack of coverage was obvious-the market is too small. In other words, the costs of broadcast television were larger than any offsetting advertising revenues. After an investigation, we found that the costs of carrying such local events over cable were quite small.

We started our local program origination in Bellingham, Wash. (population 35.000). We have met with a great deal of success both from our subscribers and from the public as a whole. We have or plan in the near future to carry in all of our CATV systems such programing as:

(1) City council meetings.

(2) Local industry training and educational programs.

(3) Local college and high school debates, plays, and sporting events.

(4) Boy Scout live training sessions (same for other local clubs).

(5) March of Dimes auction sale.

(6) Home movies taken and narrated by local residents.

This type of programing-and we have only scratched the surface—is local expression in its highest sense. It is programing that the broadcaster normally does not carry because it is uneconomical. Therefore, we do not compete for programing or advertising with the broadcaster.

We are providing an added service, not a supplementary one. Why should a neighborhood or community, just because it may be small, be denied the right of expression through the medium of television? I have heard that a television With 1,000 station needs 15,000 homes to be economically viable. We don't. homes we can provide local programing.

If the FCC is concerned about pay TV riding in on the back of off-the-air television, our company would support legislation that would allow the FCC at its discretion to restrict pay TV on CATV. But, why should we penalize our type of programing if the real concern is over pay TV? I think some people are confused and are thinking that program origination is analogous to pay TV. This is not the case. The type of local interest programing we do has nothing to do with pay TV. Therefore, we are opposed to any legislation which would grant the We feel that FCC power to restrict local-interest-type program origination. Congress should properly be more definitive in this area and make it clear in whatever legislation it passes that such programing should be nurtured and encouraged.

We are excited and convinced that in addition to a reception of off-the-air ransportation service CATV can benefit each community it serves by providing -hannel facilities and qualified personnel to originate local programing. We ave accumulated data which indicates that a sufficient number of homes would purchase our program origination service to make our systems profitable without he carriage of any off-the-air or microwave television signals. We found this nterest to exist in large and good reception markets as well as the small and poor reception markets. This leads us to believe that our local program origination service which cannot be economically duplicated by off-the-air broadcast facilities is serving a real public need.

In summary, we are providing a vital community service and contrary to comments made by FCC Chairman William E. Henry, an outlet for local expression. We are filling a television and communications gap that can't economically be satisfied by normal broadcast facilities. The Congress and FCC should, through positive steps, insure that this type of program origination is encouraged.

STATEMENT OF HAROLD DARON, MEMBER OF CITIZENS TV COMMITTEE OF BAKER, OREG.

Mr. DARON. Mr. Chairman, my name is Harold Daron. I am an attorney in private practice in Baker, Oreg. I represent a citizens TV committee.

I regret not being able to have the opportunity at this time to present our views because I will be unable to return. But in answer to a question that Mr. Mackay had, I would like to say that our service, which I have no interest in whatsoever, our rates are $4.10 a month. We receive seven channels and also this was done by the local people to increase those channels, the number we receive based on majority vote of the people so that we can have privileges of being a part of the State of Oregon for our own television coverage.

I present this at this time.

(Mr. Daron's prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF HAROLD DARON, MEMBER OF CITIZENS TV COMMITTEE OF
BAKER, OREG.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Haroid Daron. I am an attorney in private practice in the town of Baker, Oreg., which has a population of a little over 9,000. I am a member of the Citizens TV Committee of Baker and am appearing before this committee to bring to your attention the problems which will be encountered with respect to the television viewing habits of the people of our town if the FCC is successful in imposing its proposed highly restrictive rules and regulations.

Our CATV system serves approximately 6.000 subscribers, 3,000 in La Grande and Union, of Union County, Oreg., and 2,800 in Baker, of Baker County, Oreg. We are not one of the top hundred markets, nor are we located within the contour of top 100 market stations. These highly controversial problem areas do not affect us, but other aspects of the rules do present problems and we feel that the small problems and the small viewers tend to get lost in the manipulations prompted by concern over market problems.

Because of the impending application of FCC rules which will seriously disrupt the viewing habits of the people of Baker, Oreg., by depriving them of television reception to which they feel they are entitled, more than 5,000 of the cable system adult viewers in Baker, Oreg., La Grande, and Union, Oreg., signed petitions of protest which were filed with the FCC prior to the second report and order.

It is possible to receive television off the air in Baker from channel 2, Boise (CBS-ABC), and one Spokane station, in addition to the Boise satellite, channel 13, La Grande. We assume the La Grande satellite would be generally received in Baker if high antennas were constructed. Since the satellite (channel 13) is carried on cable channel 13 with no interference or ghosting problem,

we can assume that no satisfactory overall reception is possible in Baker. It fact, no one in Baker, with the exception of two television repairmen, receive television directly off the air because of the excellent quality of picture and serv ice provided by the cable system.

Prior to 1954 it was possible with two antennas to receive in some areas £ Baker two channels off the air, one from Boise, Idaho, and one from Spokan Wash. In 1954 our CATV system got its start with those same channels, b with generally improved reception, although naturally there were problems. In 1956 the system was expanded to include reception from three Spokane network affiliates, at which time the channel from Boise was eliminated.

Between 1956 and 1963 Baker became almost entirely a cable-served community. However, we were not a part of Oregon in respect to our television viewing, te were an appendage of Washington and Idaho, as we received Washington and Idaho news, Washington and Idaho political coverage, special events, and were governed entirely by Washington time. The State of Washington was on daylight time. We were not.

In 1963 we established our first television link with our State of Oregon. We did this by a majority vote of the subscribers to the cable system in all three con munities-authorizing an increase in our monthly rate sufficient to enable the cable system to construct and maintain microwave stations to bring in sign of the Portland stations, three network affiliates and the Portland ETV channel. after which franchises were granted to the cable system in all three communities for this extension of service.

During 1964 KTVR, channel 13. a satellite station of channel 7, KTVB of Boise, Idaho, was licensed and began operations in La Grande, Oreg. Subse quently, the cable system began carrying channel 13, although it meant that chainel 6, an NBC affiliate from Spokane, Wash., had to be eliminated.

The following is a listing of the stations whose signals are carried on the cable system indicating affiliation, the channel over which the television stations broadcast and the channel on which the cable viewers in Baker see those signals:

1 The ETV station, channel 10, Portland, does not telecast all day. When it is not on the air, the cable system carries channel 12, Portland.

We, the citizens of Baker, feel that we are an integral part of our CATV system which is known as Eastern Oregon TV, Inc. We feel that we have bought and are voluntarily paying for the television which we now enjoy. In fact, through cooperation with the operator of our CATV system, we have over the past 11 years of operation determined the type of cable operation which we feel is in our best interest and have gone to some lengths to establish the best possible television reception we can reasonably obtain.

We have no quarrel with the carriage requirements set forth by the FCC, as we feel that the La Grande station has a place in our TV spectrum. It gives our people in Baker an opportunity to have and to see some Baker events corered by television and for some of us to occasionally get on TV. I think everybody is a ham at heart. I'm sure you have observed the audience at a baseball or football game when the cameras are turned on them.

We do not believe, however, that the La Grande station should be considered a local station with respect to Baker because (1) it is located some 40 miles to the north of Baker and is in a completely separate and distinct valley, and (2) we do not feel that under any circumstances should a satellite station which is merely an extension of a parent station for the purpose of expanding the economic base, ever be considered a "local" station and entitled to such protection as would be given to such a station by the FCC.

Channel 13, the newcomer, has not been content to live peacefully with the established CATV system, but has demanded the complete nonduplication protection as provided for by the FCC rules. If compliance is required in spite of the petition for waiver filed by our CATV system, the result will be a complete disruption of our television service in complete disregard of what our people want, worked and paid for in the way of television viewing. The net effect of the FCC action in this regard is that the FCC is telling the people of Baker what they are going to be permitted to view and at what time, on the premise that the FCC is acting in their best interest.

Our local CATV subscribers resent this intrusion by outsiders, namely, the FCC and Boise, Idaho, television interests, in making us again choose between loss of Oregon relationships or loss of many favorite television programs.

We submit that we are much better qualified to determine what is in our best interest in terms of reception of television service in our area and our circumstance than either the FCC or Boise television interests.

The nonduplication requirement, other than simultaneous, will seriously disrupt established viewing patterns of the people of Baker, will require us to make choices between Oregon programs, news, and special events which we are not now required to make and will seriously curtail the television service which we now receive.

Much of this difficulty arises in our area because the parent station, channel 7 of Boise, Idaho, is located in the mountain time zone and we are in the Pacific time zone.

Some of the programs broadcast by the La Grande station are received by network feed from the East. All other stations receive their programs on the west coast delayed network feed. Programs broadcast by La Grande are, therefore, broadcast 2 hours later by the other stations. This means, for example, that the "Sunday Night Movie" (ABC) is broadcast from La Grande at 7 p.m., Pacific time and is broadcast from Portland and Spokane at 9 p.m., Pacific time. I would like to give you a few more examples of the channel confusion which will result from the FCC orders.

The "Tuesday Night Movie" is telecast on Tuesday evenings at 6 p.m. by the La Grande station, and is carried, of course, by the cable system. At the same time, channel 8 from Portland telecasts Huntley-Brinkley and thereafter Oregon local news which is carried on the cable system. If same-day nonduplication is required the cable viewers will not be able to see the "Tuesday Night Movie" at a later time that evening when it is telecast by channel 8 from Portland. This means that a 6 p.m. in the evening the viewers have a dilemma in terms of choice of program. At 6:30 p.m. on Monday evening channel 13 carries "Jesse James." At the same time, channel 8 from Portland carries Portland local news and channel 6 from Portland carries Walter Cronkite; those wishing to see either Portland local news or Walter Cronkite must forego "Jesse James" because sameday nonduplication protection will mean that when "Jesse James" is telecast by channel 8 later in the evening it will be blacked out.

One of the ridiculous effects will be to throw a prime time NBC program against another prime time NBC program. "The Virginian" is broadcast over Portland channel 8 from 7:30 to 9 p.m., Wednesday evening. It is immediately followed (9-10) by "Bob Hope." La Grande has demanded nonduplication of the "Bob Hope" program which it broadcasts at 8-9 p.m. The viewer who customarily watches both programs must now give up one or the other, because La Grande does not carry "The Virginian."

With your indulgence I would like to give you two more examples that I will personally be required to contend with in my own household. On Wednesday nights I ordinarily go back to the office for a couple of hours or so. Between the hours of 7 and 11 p.m., I like to watch two programs. "Outdoor Sportsman" is a 2-hour sports program which I avidly watch, originated in Portland in color by a Portland man, sponsored generally by Portland advertisers, covering hunting and fishing trips, etc., in the Northwest, comes over channel 8 Portland at 7 p.m. After I come home from the office at about 10 p.m. I like to watch "I Spy," also in color. After invocation of same-day nonduplication, I will have to choose between "Outdoor Sportsman" at 7 or "I Spy,' being broadcast on channel 13, at 7 p.m. On Thursday night my family likes to watch "Bewitched" which comes over Portland channel 2 at 9 p.m. On channel 13 it is broadcast at 6 p.m., the same time as Huntley-Brinkley and local Oregon news are broadcast over Portland channel 8 which I always watch for my news coverage. Don't you