NOTICE ********************************************************* NOTICE ********************************************************* This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect. If the original document contained-- * Footnotes * Boldface & Italics --this information is missing in this version The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed too. If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect version. For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file how2ftp. File how2ftp (.txt & .wp) is in directory /pub/Bureaus/Miscellaneous/Public_Notices/ ***************************************************************** ******** $//MO&O Denying WKAG-LP carriage on US Cable, DA 96-272//$ $/300.534 Carriage of local commercial television signals/$ $/76.61 Disputes concerning carriage/$ Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 DA 96-272 In re ) ) Complaint of Kentucky New Era, Inc. ) CSR-4598-M against U.S. Cable Television Group, ) L.P. ) ) Request for Carriage ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 29, 1996 Released: March 11, 1996 By the Cable Services Bureau: 1. On October 5, 1995, Kentucky New Era, Inc., licensee of low power television station WKAG-LP (Channel 43), Hopkinsville, Kentucky, filed a complaint against U.S. Cable Television Group, L.P. ("U.S. Cable"), operator of a cable system serving Princeton, Kentucky, claiming that U.S. Cable had declined to carry the station even though WKAG-LP is a fully-qualified low power television station within the meaning of 76.56(b)(3) of the Commission's Rules and 614(c) and (h)(2) of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992). U.S. Cable responded on November 6, 1995 by alleging that the station did not provide a good quality signal and, that even if it did, complainant does not satisfy the definition of a qualified LPTV station. DISCUSSION 2. The 1992 Cable Act provides "that a cable operator is not required to carry a low power television station that does not deliver [a good quality signal] to the principal headend of a cable system." See 47 U.S.C. 534(h)(1)(B)(iii). Because the cable operator is in the best position to know whether a given station is providing a good quality signal to the system's principal headend, we believe that the initial burden of demonstrating the lack of a good quality signal appropriately falls on the cable operator. In meeting this burden, the cable operator must show that it used good engineering practices, as defined below, to measure the signal delivered to the headend. 3. With respect to the standard to be used to determine what constitutes a good quality signal, the 1992 Cable Act adopted a standard for determining the availability of VHF and UHF commercial stations at a cable system's headend: for VHF commercial station signals, the standard is -49 dBm; for UHF commercial television signals, the standard is -45 dBm. Consistent with Congress' guidance with respect to VHF and UHF commercial stations availability, we have found it reasonable to utilize the same standards as prima facie tests to initially determine, absent other evidence, whether VHF or UHF low-power stations place adequate signal levels over a cable system's principal headend. 4. To measure a station's signal to see if it meets the Commission's requirement, a cable operator's signal strength surveys should, at a minimum, include the following: 1) specific make and model numbers of the equipment used, as well as its age and most recent date(s) of calibration; 2) description(s) of the characteristics of the equipment used, such as antenna ranges and radiation patterns; 3) height of the antenna above ground level and whether the antenna was properly oriented; and 4) weather conditions and time of day when tests were done. In addition, our rules require that a cable operator must conduct multiple signal quality tests to ensure accurate results and, in turn, provide that testing information to the affected station when there is a dispute over signal level measurements. Generally, if the test results are less than -51 dBm for a UHF station, we have said that at least four readings must be taken over a two-hour period. Where the initial readings are between -51 dBm and -45 dBm, inclusive, we believe that the readings should be taken over a 24-hour period with measurements not more than four hours apart to establish reliable test results. 5. U.S. Cable has submitted data for the Princeton system consisting of readings taken over a 24-hour period. These tests were conducted by U.S. Cable's Technical Engineer on October 3 and 4, 1995. The data demonstrates, consistent with Commission requirements, that WKAG-LP's signal strength at the cable system's principal headend is substantially below the level of -45 dBm required for UHF stations. As a result, WKAG-LP is not eligible for must-carry status on U.S. Cable's system. Given our conclusion, we need not reach the other issues raised by the parties in this matter. 6. Accordingly, the petition filed October 5, 1995, by Kentucky New Era, Inc. IS DENIED, pursuant to 614(h)(2)(F) (47 U.S.C. 534) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. 7. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by 0.321 of the Commission's Rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau