WPC)V 2a BK Z Courier3|wCG Times BoldX@`7X@HP4Si; Rm. 201_1; LPT2onal)HPLA4SAD.PRSx  @\UJlX@CY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`LCourierCG Times LPT2onal)HPLA4SAD.PRSXw PE37\UJlXP2m  W f  3|w Y-#Xw PE37=9XP#X@",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2O*/WX%$CourierCG TimesCG Times BoldCG Times Italic Y-#Xw PE37=XP#<?xxx,>Fx6X@`7X@8wC;,=9Xw PE37XPD7zC;,BXz_ pi7XV"G($,hG PE37hPddddooooddpddddxodddXXddXddXdddddooL8doddNorddo8PdN8ppoddXXdpLoNpLodPDdopoopodXYXodoodddCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L"i~'K2^$(8<><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxFx6X@`7X@8wC;,=9Xw PE37XPD7zC;,BXz_ pi7XV"G($,hG PE37hP<R&HHH,d,H6X@`7h@x/c81,c PE37Pz-b81,b&_ x7Xxfxxxxxxxxxx8SxS]SxoS8SxJS`xlxxxxxxxxxxMxxxxxxofxGcxxxxxxxSxxxxxxxJxxxxJxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8xxx8xxx8xxx8xxxxxxxxxxxxxxfi]f]oJiAlJ{SxJ8.uJo]]{JoSxJxf`SfSSiJxJofx]fffxi{8SxxxfJffffz88SSSSx{SSSxxxf8`SJ8Muu]daqqZZnn{{xu{{M{aZZ5M5M҅P?k"i~'K2^18MSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88Jxir{icx{8Aui{x`xoYi{xxxl888SS8JSJSJ8SS..S.SSSS>A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/gFx6X@`7X@8wC;,=9Xw PE37XPD7zC;,BXz_ pi7XV"G($,hG PE37hP<R&HHH,d,H6X@`7h@x/c81,c PE37Pz-b81,b&_ x7X6uC;,~Xu&_ x7XXxdS]xdd]]888SS8SSJSJ.SS..J.xSSSS??.SJoJJ?JSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.dSdSdSdSdJdJdJdJdJ8.8.8.8.oSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxS]JdSxSxSxS]JxSdSdSdSdSnInIoSoSxddIdSdSdIxSxSx",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxN`xoCCCddCdoYoYFdo8Co8odooYNCodddYdddd4dddddCddddddddo8dddddYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddpddddxodddXXddXddXdddddooL8doddNorddo8PdN8ppoddXXdpLoNpLodPDdopoopodXYXodoodddCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2Df J['V"i~'K2^18PSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88Sddoxd`xx8Jo]oxdxdS]xdd]]888SS8SSJSJ.SS..J.xSSSS??.SJoJJ?JSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.dSdSdSdSdSooJdJdJdJdJ8.8.8.8.oSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxS]JdSxSxSxS]JxSdSdSdSdSnInIoSoSxddIdSdSdIxSxSxSxSxSxSxS9/SSSS8SSSSoS]/]<]S]/]/nSdnSoSxSxSod?d?dSS?S?S?SS]<]/]SxSxSxSxSxSxSo]S]?]?]?xS]SoSSS]S]Sd8SS888WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNxxxSSS8SMMSSSSSS;SSSS;88SSS..SSffSSxSYSS8SS;"xxSxSxxS哓0S88xfxxxxxxxxxx8SfS]SxoS8SxJS`xlxxxxxxxxxxMxxxxxxofxGcxxxxxxxSxxxxxxxJxxxxJxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8xxx8xxx8xxx8xxxxxxxxxxxxxfff]f]oJfA]JxSxJ8.oJo]]oJoSxJxffSfSS]J]Joff]fffffx8Sx]]fJffffz88SSSSfxSSS]]]f8`SJ8Muu]daqqZZnn{{xu{{M{aZZ5M5M҅P?k",tB^ f ^;C`ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxxxsCYoxxdoxxooCCCddCddYdY8dd88Y8ddddLL8dYYYLYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8xdxdxdxdxdYxYxYxYxYC8C8C8C8dddddddddoYxddddoYdxdxdxdxdXXddxxXxdxdxXdddddddD8ddddCdddddp8pHodp8p8dxddddxLxLxddLdLdLddpHp8odddddddodpLpLpLdoddddododxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCd]]ddddddFddddFCCddd88ddzzdddkddCddF"ddd9dCCzCdzdoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCzzzozoYzNoYdYC8YooYdYzzdzddoYoYzzozzzzzCdoozYzzzzCCddddzdddooozCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L  $//MO&O Denying W49AW carriage on CVI's Palatka, FL cable system, DA 941575//$ $/300.534 Carriage of low power television station signals/$ $/76.61 Disputes concerning carriage/$  Yv-(J Before the  Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ` `  hh,Vpp  DA941575  Y - In re:` `  hh,V) ` `  hh,V)  Y -Complaint of Pentecostalhh,V)ppCSR 4307M  Y -Revival Association, Inc. hh,V)  Y-against Cablevision hh,V)  Yz-Industries of Middle Florida, Inc.hh,V) ` `  hh,V)  YL-Request for Carriage hh,V)  Y-}  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER  X-` ` Adopted: December 20, 1994;ppReleased:sb December , 1994  Y- By the Cable Services Bureau: 1. On August 19, 1994, Pentecostal Revival Association, Inc. ("PRA" or "station"), licensee of low power television station W49AW (Channel 41), Palatka, Florida, filed a complaint against Cablevision Industries of Middle Florida, Inc. ("CVI"), an operator of a cable system serving Palatka, Florida. PRA requests that the Commission require CVI to commence carriage of W49AW. CVI filed an opposition to this complaint on October 6, 1994, to which PRA replied on October 17, 1994. CVI then filed a response to the PRA's reply on November 4, 1994 and PRA filed a rebuttal to that response on November 18,  Y-1994.t Pn!-ԍ #c PE37P#While these additional filings are clearly outside the Commission's official pleading cycle, we will  zPG"-accept them out of our concern for a complete record. See  47 C.F.R. 76.7 and note ("Each party filing a petition, comments, opposition or other pleading pursuant 76.7 is responsible for the continuing accuracy and completeness of all information in such document.") Both parties justify their additional responses by stating that they are necessary to correct factual inaccuracies in each other's pleadings. t  Y - 2. In support of its petition, PRA argues that W49AW meets all the qualifications under the Commission's LPTV signal carriage rules. PRA states that W49AW: 1) is the only"!0*(("" television station in Putnam County; 2) delivers a good quality signal to the cable headend which is only two miles away from the station's 360' transmitting tower; 3) is located in a county which is not part of the top 160 metropolitan statistical areas; 4) is located in Palatka Florida, a community with a population less than 11,000; and 5) fulfills its broadcast licensee obligations visavis minimum hours of operation, children's programming, equal employment opportunity and locallyoriginated programming. 3. In its opposition, CVI states that the Commission should deny W49AW's must carry request on substantive and procedural grounds. First, CVI argues that PRA's complaint should be dismissed because it was filed after the applicable 60 day statute of limitations had expired. The cable operator maintains that PRA's complaint was filed on August 16, 1994, more than one year after its Palatka cable system general manager informed the station by  Y -letter that its carriage request could not be honored.  Pe -ԍ#c PE37P# In a letter dated July 13, 1993, CVI's Palatka system General Manager conveyed the following information to PRA: "I am in receipt of your request to provide channel space for the Gospel Vision television station of CVI [sic] cable system in Palatka, Florida. Currently, we do not have the ability to add any more channels to our lineup in the Palatka system due to technical capacity level. Further, the total number of programming hours per day on the Gospel Vision would not provide sufficient use of a separate basic cable  zP^-channel on the cable system." See CVI opposition at Exhibit 3. CVI then asserts that the record submitted by PRA is devoid of any evidence that W49AW satisfies any of the mandatory LPTV criteria for carriage; specifically, CVI contends that the station does not demonstrate that it addresses local news and informational needs not being adequately served by full power television stations. Finally, CVI argues that the petition should be dismissed because PRA did not include a certificate of service along with its filing nor did it serve a copy of the  Yb-complaint on the requisite franchising authority.8ibS Pf-ԍ #c PE37P#While CVI suggests the station could possibly amend its complaint to include a certificate of service, it states that such an action on the station's part would be pointless since the complaint would still be considered late filed.8 4. PRA emphasizes in its reply that it did not request carriage in the summer of 1993 and that CVI has misinterpreted a letter the station sent on June 21, 1993, as a signal carriage request rather than a letter asking about availability and rates for leased access channels on  Y-the cable system.  P$ -ԍ#c PE37P# In a letter dated June 21, 1993, PRA made the following request to CVI: "As the first and only broadcast TV station serving the Putnam County Community, I hope that you will make possible a channel on your cable system so that we may reach the many in the community who do not have the pleasure of antennas to pick up regular broadcast stations. If you are not willing to put us on the air, please give me a quote on how much you will lease us a channel for. As I understand the current laws, you should make available 10% of your 36 channels for lease."  zP$-See CVI opposition at Exhibit 2; PRA reply at Exhibit 1. PRA argues that CVI's July 13, 1993, response to its initial letter recognizes that the station was concerned about leased access channel rates and not mandatory carriage. The station also asserts that it recently asked the Commission for advice concerning the metropolitan statistical area criterion only after it found out that Palatka and"0*((" Putnam County were not within the top 160 MSAs did it move forward and file its must carry complaint in August of 1994. Finally, PRA rebuts CVI's contention that it does not serve the local news and informational needs of the Putnam County Community by providing detailed data on the kind of programming it airs on a weekly basis. 5. In its response, CVI faults the station's analysis of its June 21, 1993 letter stating that W49AW, in its reply, ignored key language that exposes the communication as a request for carriage. CVI then focuses on the wording of PRA's June 21, 1994, correspondence which includes the phrase "I am asking once more for your cooperation in providing a cable  Y1-channel for assignment to W49AW."u1 P -ԍ #c PE37P#See CVI response at Exhibit A.u CVI infers that the station, in this letter, has admitted to asking for carriage before, notably in June of 1993. CVI then reargues the point that the station has not made a sufficient showing that it is qualified for carriage. 6. In its rebuttal to CVI's response, PRA explains that it first requested carriage in December 1991 when it first went ontheair and that the phrase "once again" is in reference to this request. The station then argues that since its original request was made before the 1992 Cable Act was implemented, it has no bearing on the present complaint. PRA then reiterates that its June 21, 1993, letter to CVI must be considered a leased access request and not a signal carriage request because, at the time, it did not know whether it qualified for carriage under our rules. The station then reasserts that it is a qualified low power television station and criticizes CVI for failing to explain which factor the station does not or can not meet. 7. We are persuaded by the arguments raised by CVI in its filings. We find the language of PRA's June 21, 1993 letter to CVI to be a request for carriage. The phrase ". . . make possible a channel on your cable system so that we may reach the many in your community who do not have the pleasure of antennas . . ." can be reasonably interpreted as an informal signal carriage request. This interpretation is reinforced by the wording found in PRA's June 21, 1994 communication to CVI which states ". . . I am asking once more for your cooperation in providing a cable channel for assignment to W49AW." We agree with CVI that this phrase "presupposes a prior request", one that took place more than a year before  Y7-the complaint was filed.7i PQ -ԍ #c PE37P#In its rebuttal to CVI's response, PRA argues that it requested carriage in 1991 yet it offers no proof to support its contention. We believe that a television station, like W49AW, need not employ the phrase "must carry" in every instance to communicate its desire for carriage to a cable operator. 8. Our rules setting forth must carry complaint procedures are quite clear. "No must carry complaint filed pursuant to 76.61 will be accepted by the Commission if filed more  Y!-than sixty (60) days after the . . . denial by a cable television system operator of a request"!0*((""  Y-for carriage . . . ."o Py-ԍ #c PE37P#47 C.F.R. 76.7(c)(4)(iii).o W49AW's complaint was filed on August 19, 1994, more than 13 months after CVI formally denied the station's carriage request on July 13, 1993. Moreover, we also find merit in CVI's argument that the station did not adhere to our rules because it did not provide a certificate of service along with its petition and it neglected to serve a copy of the complaint on the local franchising authority. Again our rules are straightforward in this matter. "The petition for special relief or mustcarry complaint may be submitted informally, by letter, but shall be accompanied by a certificate of service on any cable television system operator, franchising authority, station licensee, permittee, or applicant, or  YH-any other interested person who may be directly affected if the relief requested is granted."gHi Pb -ԍ #c PE37P#47 C.F.R. 76.7(b).g  Y1-Because of these errors in law, W49AW's complaint must be dismissed. 1  P -ԍ #c PE37P#Because we resolve the case on these grounds, we need not reach the issue of whether the station meets all the necessary qualifications for carriage. 9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the petition (CSR4307M) filed August 19, 1993, by Pentecostal Revival Association, Inc. IS DISMISSED as incomplete and untimely filed. 10. These actions are taken pursuant to authority delegated by 0.321 of the Commission's rules. ` `  hh, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  Y-` `  hh, sb   sb William H. Johnson ` `  hh, Deputy Chief, Cable Service Bureau